Can I pass Audio/Video object from expo-av into redux state? - javascript

I want to have a global Audio/Video object in my react-native application. I have a player and I want to manipulate music player in every side of my application. But I correctly dont know how I can create a global Audio/Video object and use functions like play/pause/setNewSong globally from different components. And my question is can I create redux store and pass audio object into store? Or maybe I must do it in another way. Thank you for answers

Don't put non-serializable values like class instances into the Redux store.
You should probably keep this near the root of your React component tree and make it accessible to the rest of the app using React's Context API.

Related

I wonder if I can have a redux store in the library and the App also have a redux store

I'm really new to React and need to ask.
Can I have a ReactJs Redux store in a library and then use that library in an App that also has a Redux store?
Both of them do this:
<Provider store={store}>
..App
</Provider>
I learn ReactJs and am not sure I understand how this is built up how Webpack is loading the code here.
Will these two React Stores collide?
Can they exist independently?
Can they share Reducers? (let's say the App want to use the library Redux store and send a dispatch to it )
I have tested doing some of this but can't make it work. It's like Redux after first loading the library Redux store then it can't load the App store but I'm a novice so must ask
Will these two React Stores collide? / Can they exist independently?
Two different stores created with createStore will not collide, and can exist independently.
behind the scenes, each store instance has a subscribe method, and its own subscribers array.
When using the react-redux Provider component, you are sending an instance of the store down the component tree with React's context API. The instance will be available to all children and decedents of the component which rendered the Provider. If there is another Provider in the way, that Provider's value will override the higher up Provider.
Thus, if you use another Provider with another instance of a store in your library, it will take effect only for the component tree starting from your library component. With the correct composition, there will be no collision.
Can they share Reducers?
Reducers are nothing but pure functions, meaning they shouldn't have any side effects. So you could export and reuse the same reducer logic if you want, you'll just need to register them with every store instance.
Lastly, I disagree with other answers here which claim you shouldn't use multiple stores. You have the exact use case where a separate store would be justified, where you have your main application using one store, and you have a standalone library that uses another unrelated global state.
In my opinion, everything is possible in the programming world, definitely, having a multi-store is possible too.
You asked several questions, first of all, I answer them and then explain a little bit more.
Can I have a Reactjs Redux store in a library and then use that library in an App that also has a Redux store?
Yeah, it's possible, the famous library that makes Redux easy to use is Redux Toolkit, which has a very easy flow to use and implement in your application, even it has a CRA template that you can create your application (zero-config) based on redux npx create-react-app [my-app-name] --template redux or redux-typescript npx create-react-app my-app --template redux-typescript. it works properly.
Will these two React Stores collide?
Can they exist independently?
No, they won't collide because each store (never mind it is redux, mobx, or whatever) has a Provider and you should wrap part of your application or entire of it by using that <Provider store={store}>, so if you wanna have two stores, you can add two Providers and they won't collide. but, in connecting, and getting some data from stores, you should pay attention that which Provider you are going to call from. so they will be able to exist independently.
<ReduxOneProvider store={storeOne}>
<ReduxTwoProvider store={storeTwo}>
<MobxProvider store={mobXStore}>
<App>
</MobxProvider>
</ReduxTWoProvider>
</ReduxOneProvider>
But, totally, I'm not a fan of having multi-store, for more info read here
Can they share Reducers? (let's say the App want to use the library Redux store and send a dispatch to it )
Yes, you know, reducer functions are separate pure functions, located in a folder, when you wanna build your stores, you should gather these functions and combine them, so, the answer is yes, but please consider, the connect function which comes from react-redux want two functions, mapStateToProps and mapDispatchToProps, inside the second you can call a reducer by using dispatch function. so you will have re-render in all stores.
my opinion:
Please avoid having a multi-store, even having one and dealing with it, makes the project a little bit hard to maintain. how you wanna deal with multi. it makes complicated issues.
Yes it is possible.
To keep it simple, library is completely independent package where you can use the redux in normal way. And as you export the library's components to outer world, in same way export the store or dispatch which you would like to use in your application which is consuming the library.

What is deferent in using between "context" and "localStorage" in ReactJS?

I had this question during using context in ReactJS.
"context" is used to save global values which are used in children components.
Also localStorage is used to save global values.
So we can use both in same purpose.
What can we do better using context than using localStorage in ReactJS?
Read the docs before writing a question :)
"Context lets us pass a value deep into the component tree without explicitly threading it through every component". It's React specific and the components rerenders when the values change.
https://reactjs.org/docs/context.html
LocalStorage is Web API and saves data in the browser. Changing localStorage won't trigger a rerender.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Window/localStorage
It depends on what you need, read the docs and you will understand better.

Why do we use the context API in React?

So I had this thought occur to me today. I've been learning React for a bit, and I often hear the Context API as a shared data source for nested components. You instantiate a context, wrap all the components you want to have access to in that context's provider, and do what you need to with that data inside each component.
My question then is essentially, why do we use the Context API instead of just using a shared reference to a value inside a module? At the end of the day the useContext hook and Context.Consumer require an amount of code roughly equivalent to simply importing a module across all the components that need access to its data.
I'm struggling to understand how using the Context API actually solves any problems that couldn't just as easily be solved with what the browser already provides us, so what am I missing here?

Nuxt JS | Where/how to set global data

Today I started playing with NuxtJS and was wondering what the best way to set/retrieve global data would be?
For example a phone number that gets repeated throughout a site, should be managed from a single location.
Would AsyncData be the way to go? Is that overkill?
In Vue.js you'd have global data attached to the main Vue instance. What is the Nuxt equivalent of this (if there is one).
Take a look at Vuex, the vue state management pattern and library.
It serves as a centralized store for all the components in a vue application.

Correct way to have a global variable in react

I'm developing a react.js project and before the main component is rendered, I call a function that returns an object that all components should be able to access. What is the correct way of doing this in react? Currently, I'm just passing it as a prop to the main component and then I suppose I should have to remember to pass it as a prop to all other components. Is there an easier or better way of doing this?
It seems like you are doing something like Redux. Passing the object as props should be okay. You could make a higher-order component that wraps your components and adds access to that global object via props. This is similar to Redux's connect.
As the expectation in React is application-wide concerns ,like a flux/redux/apollo store, are kept in a root provider component’s context and then accessed elsewhere in the component tree via a Higher Order Component or render props. This provides relief from globals and circular dependencies, and makes testing those components easier.
However, if you have non-component code that will need access to configuration values, you may need to use config global and writing components in a way that accepts config values from props.
see: https://github.com/lorenwest/node-config

Categories

Resources