I'm working on a project where a prospect needs to be sent an email about a property they are interested in. There is a top level component that fetches the property information and prospect's contact info from the database and passes to its children. There are two components that share the same process of formatting the information, and then call an email function that sends off an email. A sample of one component looks like this:
import sendEmail from 'actions/sendEmail'
class PropertyDetail extends React.Componet {
state = {
unit: undefined,
prospect: undefined,
};
componentDidMount = () => {
this.setState({
unit: this.props.unit,
prospect: this.props.prospect,
});
};
sendEmail = ({ id, address, prospect }) => {
// quite a bit more gets formatted and packaged up into this payload
const payload = {
id,
address,
prospectEmail: prospect.email,
};
emailFunction(payload);
};
handleEmail = () => {
sendEmail(this.state);
};
render() {
return (
<div>
<h1>{this.state.unit.address}</h1>
<p>Send prospect an email about this property</p>
<button onClick={this.handleEmail}>Send Email</button>
</div>
);
}
}
and the other component looks like this
class UpdateShowing extends React.Component {
state = {
unit: undefined,
prospect: undefined,
showingTime: undefined,
};
componentDidMount = () => {
this.setState({
unit: this.props.unit,
propsect: this.props.prospect,
showingTime: this.props.showingTime,
});
};
sendEmail = ({ id, address, prospectEmail }) => {
// quite a bit more gets formatted and packaged up into this payload
const payload = {
id,
address,
prospectEmail,
};
emailFunction(payload);
};
handleUpdate = newTime => {
// get the new date for the showing ...
this.setState({
showingTime: newTime,
});
// call a function to update the new showing in the DB
updateShowingInDB(newTime);
sendEmail(this.state);
};
render() {
return (
<div>
<p>Modify the showing time</p>
<DatePickerComponent />
<button onClick={this.handleUpdate}>Update Showing</button>
</div>
);
}
}
So I see some shared functionality that I'd love to not have to repeat in each component. I'm still learning (working my first job), and why not use this as an opportunity to grow my skills? So I want to get better at the HOC/Render props pattern, but I'm not sure if this is the place to use one.
Should I create a component with a render prop (I'd rather use this pattern instead of a HOC)? I'm not even sure what that would look like, I've read the blogs and watched the talks, ala
<MouseMove render={(x, y) => <SomeComponent x={x} y={y} />} />
But would this pattern be applicable to my case, or would I be better off defining some lib function that handles formatting that payload for the email and then importing that function into the various components that need it?
Thanks!
I think a provider or a component using render props with branching is a better fit for you here
see this doc: https://lucasmreis.github.io/blog/simple-react-patterns/#render-props
Related
Okay, this might sound complicated but it will be easy if you read the following example. The main purpose of this is to separate the logic from the actual render code. Making the component smaller and (in theory) easier to test.
class NameProvider {
public getName(): Promise<string> {
return Promise.resolve("Cool name");
}
}
interface RenderProps {
name: string;
onGetNamePress(): void;
}
interface LogicProps {
nameProvider: NameProvider;
render: React.ComponentType<RenderProps>
}
function Render({name, onGetNamePress}: RenderProps): React.ReactElement {
return <>
<p>{name}</p>
<button title="Get name!" onClick={onGetNamePress} />
</>
}
function Logic({nameProvider, render: Render}: LogicProps): React.ReactElement {
const [name, setName] = React.useState<string>();
return <Render
name={name}
onGetNamePress={fetch}
/>
async function fetch() {
setName(await nameProvider.getName());
}
}
Testing the render component is rather easy, but how do I test that the props passed to the render component are correct? Especially after the state changed.
Consider the following:
it('fetches the name after the button was pressed', () => {
const mnp = new MockNameProvider();
render(<Logic
nameProvider={mnp}
render={({name, onGetNamePress}) => {
act(async () => {
await onGetNamePress();
expect(name).toBe(mockName);
})
}}
/>)
})
This will cause an infinite loop, as the state keeps getting changed and the name fetched. I also couldn't imagine how to get the new props. This current code will test the old ones to my understanding. So my question is, how do I test if the props are correctly passed (also after updates).
(Important) Notes:
I'm actually writing a react native app, so maybe the issue is specific to native testing but I didn't think so.
This is not code from our codebase and just cobbled together. Thus also the React prefix, vscode just liked that better in an unsaved file.
I have no clue why the selected dropdown value is one step behind in the URL search params string. My url is like this: http://localhost/?dropdownsel=. Below is my code:
//App.js
//update params value
function setParams({ dropdownsel }) {
const searchParams = new URLSearchParams();
searchParams.set("dropdownsel", dropdownsel);
return searchParams.toString();
}
class App extends Component {
state = {
dropdownsel: ""
};
//update url params
updateURL = () => {
const url = setParams({
dropdownsel: this.state.dropdownsel
});
//do not forget the "?" !
this.props.history.push(`?${url}`);
};
onDropdownChange = dropdownsel => {
this.setState({ dropdwonsel: dropdownsel });
this.updateURL();
};
render() {
return (
<Dropdownsel
onChange={this.onDropdownselChange}
value={this.state.dropdownsel}
/>
);
}
}
Below is dropdownsel component code:
//Dropdownsel.js
const attrData = [{ id: 1, value: AA }, { id: 2, value: BB }];
class Dropdownsel extends Component {
onDropdownChange = event => {
this.props.onChange(event.target.value);
};
render() {
return (
<div>
<select value={this.props.value} onChange={this.onDropdownChange}>
<option value="">Select</option>
{attrData.map(item => (
<option key={item.id} value={item.value}>
{" "}
{item.name}
</option>
))}
</select>
</div>
);
}
}
export default Dropdownsel;
Thanks for formatting my code. I don't know how to do it every time when I post question. I figured it out myself. I need to make a call back function for updateURL() because the setState() is not executed immediately. so my code should be revised like below:
onDropdownChange = (dropdownsel) => {
this.setState({ dropdwonsel:dropdownsel }, ()=>{this.updateURL();
});
};
The problem occurs because this.setState is asynchronous (like a Promise or setTimeout are)
So there are two workarounds for your specific case.
Workaround #1 - using a callback
Use the callback option of this.setState.
When you take a look at the declaration of setState, it accepts an "optional" callback method, which is called when the state has been updated.
setState(updater[, callback])
What it means is that, within the callback, you have an access to the updated state, which was called asynchronously behind the scene by React.
So if you call this.updateURL() within the callback, this.state.dropdownsel value will be the one you are expecting.
Instead of,
this.setState({ dropdwonsel: dropdownsel });
this.updateURL();
Call this.updateURL in the callback.
// Note: '{ dropdwonsel }' is equal to '{ dropdwonsel: dropdwonsel }'
// If your value is same as the state, you can simplify this way
this.setState({ dropdwonsel }, () => {
this.updateURL()
});
Workaround #2 - passing the new value directly
You can also pass the new value directly as an argument of this.updateURL() (which might make testing easier as it makes you method depend on a value, which you can fake).
this.setState({ dropdwonsel });
this.updateURL(dropdownsel );
Now your this.updateURL doesn't depend on the this.state.dropdownsel, thus you can can use the arg to push the history.
//update url params
updateURL = dropdownsel => {
const url = setParams({
dropdownsel
});
//do not forget the "?" !
this.props.history.push(`?${url}`);
};
I'm trying to create a very simple CMS that allows the user to update certain areas on the page.
I have a h3 tag where I want to be able to pass a ref to my onChange function so that I can grab it's innerHTML text (that gets changed by contentEditable) and pass on the new data that gets changed to my back-end server. However, I'm having trouble being able to grab the innerHTML (of the new data) of the correct looped h3 that wants to get changed.
I read documentation online that ref would help me with this but it only gives me an example of where it does it in the render method instead of how to pass it to a function within the ref.
In short, I want to be able to modify my h3 tag (within the cms) with new data and send it to my back-end server to upload to my db.
Also, I tried playing around with not putting it inside of a function and I manage to get access to the myRef.current however in the console it shows as null I want to be able to get access to the specified ref's blogTopic Id so I know which mapped id I'm sending to my back-end server.
I have a lot of code so I'm only going to show the part where I'm stuck on:
class Blogtopics extends React.Component {
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.myRef = React.createRef();
this.state = {
blogData: [],
blogTopic: "",
};
}
Selectblogtopics = async () => {
const blogTopics = await blogtopicsService.selectblogTopics();
this.setState({
blogData: blogTopics
});
};
editorData = (event, content) => {
let data = content.getData();
//this.setState({ blogContent: data });
};
onChange = (event, content) => {
const node = this.myRef;
//where im stuck
console.log(node);
};
render() {
const node = this.myRef;
console.log(node);
return (
{this.state.blogData.map((rows, index) => (
<div className="blogWrapper" key={uuid()}>
<div className="col-md-6">
<h3
suppressContentEditableWarning
contentEditable={this.state.isEditing}
style={
this.state.isEditing === true
? { border: "1px solid #000", padding: "5px" }
: null
}
onInput={e => this.onChange(e)}
ref={e => this.onChange(e, this.myRef)}
//onBlur={e => this.onChange(e)}
>
{rows.blog_category}
</div>
))}
);
}
}
export default Blogtopics;
onChange = (event) => {
const nodeContent = this.myRef.current.innerHTML;
console.log(nodeContent);
};
<h3 ... ref={this.myRef} onInput={this.onChange} ... >
will work. But since onInput passes target element you don't even need to use ref:
onChange = ({ target }) => {
console.log(target.innerHTML);
}
<h3 onInput={this.onChange} >
I've been searching for a couple of hours now, but just can't seem to find the answer. See my code below. I'm requesting some metro-information to be used on an info-screen.
I'm getting the information, seeing as console.log works. However I'm having difficulty using this resulting oject. I want to use the data received, so that I can display when the next train arives. To this purpose I try to setState with the result, so that I can access the data-elements further down. However, now I'm stuck at setState giving me problems. I feel that I need to bind the function, but this.main = this.main.bind(this) doesn't work.
import React from "react";
import { GraphQLClient } from "graphql-request";
class Rutetider extends React.Component {
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.state = {
stoppestedet: "rutetider lastes ned"
};
async function main() {
const endpoint = "https://api.entur.org/journeyplanner/2.0/index/graphql";
const graphQLClient = new GraphQLClient(endpoint, {
headers: {
ET: "lossfelt-tavle"
}
});
const query = `
{
stopPlace(id: "NSR:StopPlace:58249") {
id
name
estimatedCalls(timeRange: 3600, numberOfDepartures: 20) {
realtime
aimedArrivalTime
aimedDepartureTime
expectedArrivalTime
expectedDepartureTime
actualArrivalTime
actualDepartureTime
cancellation
notices {
text
}
situations {
summary {
value
}
}
date
forBoarding
forAlighting
destinationDisplay {
frontText
}
quay {
id
}
serviceJourney {
journeyPattern {
line {
id
name
transportMode
}
}
}
}
}
}
`;
const data = await graphQLClient.request(query);
console.log(data);
this.setState({ stoppestedet: data.stopPlace.name });
}
main().catch(error => console.error(error));
}
render() {
return (
<div>
rutetider
<div className="grid-container2">
<div>Mot byen</div>
<div>fra byen</div>
<div>{this.state.stoppestedet}</div>
</div>
</div>
);
}
}
export default Rutetider;
"probably easier" is to use integrated solution (apollo) than minimal, low level library. In most cases (as project grows), with more components fetching data managing separate GraphQLClient for all of them won't be an optimal solution. Apollo gives you centralised "fetching point", cache .. and many more.
Syntax error comes from function - in class it's enough to write async main()
https://codesandbox.io/s/l25r2kol7q
It probably would be better to save entire data in state and extract needed parts later (at render) and use this object as 'data-ready flag' (as I did for place - 'stoppestedet') - initally undefined (in constructor) for initial render (conditional rendering, some <Loading /> component):
render() {
if (!this.state.stoppestedet) return "rutetider lastes ned";
return (
<div>
rutetider
<div className="grid-container2">
<div>Mot byen</div>
<div>fra byen</div>
<div>{this.renderFetchedDataTable()}</div>
</div>
Lets imagine we want an input for a "product" (stored in redux) price value.
I'm struggle to come up with the best way to handle input constraints. For simplicity, lets just focus on the constraint that product.price cannot be empty.
It seems like the 2 options are:
1: Controlled
Implementation: The input value is bound to product.price. On change dispatches the changePrice() action.
The main issue here is that if we want to prevent an empty price from entering the product store, we essentially block the user from clearing the input field. This isn't ideal as it makes it very hard to change the first digit of the number (you have to select it and replace it)!
2: Using defaultValue
Implementation: We set the price initially using input defaultValue, that allows us to control when we want to actually dispatch changePrice() actions and we can do validation handling in the onChange handler.
This works well, unless the product.price is ever updated from somewhere other than the input change event (for example, an applyDiscount action). Since defaultValue doesn't cause rerenders, the product.price and the input are now out of sync!
So what am I missing?
There must be a simple & elegant solution to this problem but I just can't seem to find it!
What I have done in the past is to use redux-thunk and joi to solve input constraints/validation using controlled inputs.
In general I like to have one update action that will handle all the field updating. So for example if you have two inputs for a form, it would looks something like this:
render() {
const { product, updateProduct } = this.props;
return (
<div>
<input
value={product.name}
onChange={() => updateProduct({...product, name: e.target.value})}
/>
<input
value={product.price}
onChange={() => updateProduct({...product, price: e.target.value})}
/>
</div>
)
}
Having one function/action here simplifies my forms a great deal. The updateProject action would then be a thunk action that handles side effects. Here is our Joi Schema(based off your one requirement) and updateProduct Action mentioned above. As a side note, I also tend to just let the user make the mistake. So if they don't enter anything for price I would just make the submit button inactive or something, but still store away null/empty string in the redux store.
const projectSchema = Joi.object().keys({
name: Joi.number().string(),
price: Joi.integer().required(), // price is a required integer. so null, "", and undefined would throw an error.
});
const updateProduct = (product) => {
return (dispatch, getState) {
Joi.validate(product, productSchema, {}, (err, product) => {
if (err) {
// flip/dispatch some view state related flag and pass error message to view and disable form submission;
}
});
dispatch(update(product)); // go ahead and let the user make the mistake, but disable submission
}
}
I stopped using uncontrolled inputs, simply because I like to capture the entire state of an application. I have very little local component state in my projects. Keep in mind this is sudo code and probably won't work if directly copy pasted. Hope it helps.
So I think I've figure out a decent solution. Basically I needed to:
Create separate component that can control the input with local state.
Pass an onChange handler into the props that I can use to dispatch my changePrice action conditionally
Use componentWillReceiveProps to keep the local value state in sync with the redux store
Code (simplified and in typescript):
interface INumberInputProps {
value: number;
onChange: (val: number) => void;
}
interface INumberInputState {
value: number;
}
export class NumberInput extends React.Component<INumberInputProps, INumberInputState> {
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.state = {value: props.value};
}
public handleChange = (value: number) => {
this.setState({value});
this.props.onChange(value);
}
//keeps local state in sync with redux store
public componentWillReceiveProps(props: INumberInputProps){
if (props.value !== this.state.value) {
this.setState({value: props.value});
}
}
public render() {
return <input value={this.state.value} onChange={this.handleChange} />
}
}
In my Product Component:
...
//conditionally dispatch action if meets valadations
public handlePriceChange = (price: number) => {
if (price < this.props.product.standardPrice &&
price > this.props.product.preferredPrice &&
!isNaN(price) &&
lineItem.price !== price){
this.props.dispatch(updatePrice(this.props.product, price));
}
}
public render() {
return <NumberInput value={this.props.product.price} onChange={this.handlePriceChange} />
}
...
What i would do in this case is to validate the input onBlur instead of onChange.
For example consider these validations in the flowing snippet:
The input can't be empty.
The input should not contain "foo".
class App extends React.Component {
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.state = {
myVal: '',
error: ''
}
}
setError = error => {
this.setState({ error });
}
onChange = ({ target: { value } }) => {
this.setState({ myVal: value })
}
validateInput = ({ target: { value } }) => {
let nextError = '';
if (!value.trim() || value.length < 1) {
nextError = ("Input cannot be empty!")
} else if (~value.indexOf("foo")) {
nextError = ('foo is not alowed!');
}
this.setError(nextError);
}
render() {
const { myVal, error } = this.state;
return (
<div>
<input value={myVal} onChange={this.onChange} onBlur={this.validateInput} />
{error && <div>{error}</div>}
</div>
);
}
}
ReactDOM.render(<App />, document.getElementById('root'));
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react/15.1.0/react.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react/15.1.0/react-dom.min.js"></script>
<div id="root"></div>
Edit
As a followup to your comments.
To make this solution more generic, i would pass the component a predicate function as a prop, only when the function will return a valid result i would call the onChange that passed from the parent or whatever method you pass that updating the store.
This way you can reuse this pattern in other components and places on your app (or even other projects).