Develop Reference

React setState within Promise.all

I'm working on a project where we would like run multiple fetches in parallel to a very slow API. Ideally, we would like to populate our interface for the user as this data is received and do so in a summative manner. These requests may or may not resolve in the order that the API calls were made.
Most use cases of Promise.all with a setState involve setting state after all promises have resolved. However, what I'm looking to do demands setting state as a side effect within the child promises themselves, I believe.
So this is (simplified) what I am doing to achieve this:
const request = async (setState, endpoint) => {
const response = await fetch(endpoint);
const data = response.json();
setState(state => ({ ...state, ...data }))
}
// Called within React component as a side effect
const fetchAllData = (setState) => {
Promise.all(
[
request(setState, url_1),
request(setState, url_2),
request(setState, url_3)
]
)
}
Now, I'm running some testing and this does appear to work. I believe I should not be running into race conditions with the state because setState is being passed a function. However, I do wonder if I'm doing something dangerous with respect to React, updating state, and rendering.
Is there anything wrong with this picture?

There's nothing wrong with immediately updating state from each individual promise; this will work just fine. You might have a race condition if every request attempts to update the same bit of data, but as long as they write different parts of your state you should be fine (the state updater callback pattern is necessary though).
The only thing wrong with your code is the missing error handling, and that the Promise.all is currently a bit superfluous.

Javascript Canceling Function that contains list of await tasks

I was wondering if there is any to cancel / stop execution of a javascript function that contains multiple await functions. Due to the nature of promises and their lack of proper cancellations, is there any other implementation or library to help me achieve something like this?
async function run(x,y,z) {
return new Promise(async(resolve,reject) => {
await doSomething(x)
await doSomething(y)
//cancel could be happen around here and stop the last "doSomething"
await doSomething(z)
})
}
setTimeout(() => {
run.cancel()
},500) //cancel function after 500ms

To just stop the advancement from one function call to the next, you can do something like this:
function run(x, y, z) {
let stop = false;
async function run_internal() {
await doSomething(x)
if (stop) throw new Error("cancelled");
await doSomething(y)
if (stop) throw new Error("cancelled");
await doSomething(z)
}
return {
cancel: () => {
stop = true;
},
promise: run_internal();
};
}
const retVal = run(a, b, c);
retVal.promise.then(result => {
console.log(result);
}).catch(err => {
console.log(err);
})
setTimeout(() => {
retVal.cancel()
}, 500); //cancel function after 500ms
Javascript does not have a generic way to "abort" any further execution of a function. You can set a flag via an external function and then check that flag in various points of your function and adjust what you execute based on that flag.
Keep in mind that (except when using workerThreads or webWorkers), Javascript runs your code in a single thread so when it's running, it's running and none of your other code is running. Only when it returns control back to the event loop (either by returning or by hitting an await) does any of your other code get a chance to run and do anything. So, "when it's actually running", your other code won't be running. When it's sitting at an await, your other code can run and can set a flag that can be checked later (as my example above shows).
fetch() in a browser has some experimental support for the AbortController interface. But, please understand that once the request has been sent, it's been sent and the server will receive it. You likely won't be aborting anything the server is doing. If the response still hasn't come back yet or is in the process of coming back, your abort may be able to interrupt that. Since you can't really know what is getting aborted, I figure it's better to just put a check in your own code so that you won't process the response or advance to further processing based on a flag you set.
You could wrap this flag checking into an AbortController interface if you want, but it doesn't change the fundamental problem in any way - it just affects the API you expose for calling an abort.

The way to actually use cancellation is through the AbortController which is available in the browser and on Node 15+
Node reference: https://nodejs.org/api/globals.html#class-abortcontroller
MDN reference: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/AbortController
Some APIs are currently using out of the box the abort signal like fetch in the browser or setTimeout timers API in Node (https://nodejs.org/api/timers.html#timerspromisessettimeoutdelay-value-options).
For custom functions/APIs you need to implement it by yourself but it's highly encouraged to follow the Abort signal methodology so you can chain both custom and oob functions and make use of a single signal that does not need translation

Firing Vuex actions asynchronously and sequentially - what am I not understanding?

I have a Vuex store and I am trying to fetch data from the Firebase Realtime Database. I am initially fetching the user information, however afterwards I would like to fetch some other information that relies upon the initial data fetched.
As you can see from the code, I am trying to do this using async / await, however whenever firing the two actions in my created() hook, the user's information isn't initialised, and therefore the second action fails.
My user store
async fetchCreds({ commit }) {
try {
firebase.auth().onAuthStateChanged(async function(user) {
const { uid } = user
const userDoc = await users.doc(uid).get()
return commit('SET_USER', userDoc.data())
})
} catch (error) {
console.log(error)
commit('SET_USER', {})
}
}
My club action which relies upon the above call
async fetchClubInformation({ commit, rootState }) {
try {
const clubIDForLoggedInUser = rootState.user.clubId
const clubDoc = await clubs.doc(clubIDForLoggedInUser).get()
return commit('SET_CLUB_INFO', clubDoc.data())
} catch (error) {
console.log(error)
}
}
}
The methods being called within my component's created() method.
created: async function() {
await this.fetchCreds();
await this.fetchClubInformation();
this.loading = false;
}
I have a feeling I'm fundamentally misunderstanding async / await, but I can't understand what in the code is incorrect - any help or advice would be greatly appreciated.

I'm not particularly familiar with Firebase but after a bit of digging through the source code I think I can shed a little light on your problems.
Firstly, consider the following example:
async function myFn (obj) {
obj.method(function () {
console.log('here 1')
})
console.log('here 2')
}
await myFn(x)
console.log('here 3')
Question: What order will you see the log messages?
Well here 2 will definitely come before here 3 but it's impossible to tell from the code above when here 1 will show up. It depends on what obj.method does with the function it's been passed. It might never call it at all. It might call it synchronously (e.g. Array's forEach method), in which case here 1 will appear before the other messages. If it's asynchronous (e.g. timers, server calls) then here 1 may not show up for some time, long after here 3.
The async modifier will implicitly return a Promise from the function if it doesn't return a Promise itself. The resolved value of that Promise will be the value returned from the function and the Promise will resolve at the point the function returns. For a function without a return at the end that's equivalent to it finishing with return undefined.
So, to stress the key point, the Promise returned by an async function will only wait until that function returns.
The method onAuthStateChanged calls its callback asynchronously, so the code in that callback won't run until after the surrounding function has completed. There's nothing to tell the implicitly returned Promise to wait for that callback to be invoked. The await inside the callback is irrelevant as that function hasn't even been called yet.
Firebase makes extensive use of Promises, so typically the solution would just be to return or await the relevant Promise:
// Note: This WON'T work, explanation follows
return firebase.auth().onAuthStateChanged(async function(user) {
// Note: This WON'T work, explanation follows
await firebase.auth().onAuthStateChanged(async function(user) {
This won't work here because onAuthStateChanged doesn't actually return a Promise, it returns an unsubscribe function.
You could, of course, create a new Promise yourself and 'fix' it that way. However, creating new Promises using new Promise is generally considered a code smell. Typically it's only necessary when wrapping code that doesn't support Promises properly. If we're working with a library that has proper Promise support (as we are here) then we shouldn't need to create any Promises.
So why doesn't onAuthStateChanged return a Promise?
Because it's a way of watching all sign-in/sign-out events. Every time the user signs in or signs out it'll call the callback. It isn't intended as a way to watch a particular sign-in. A Promise can only be resolved once, to a single value. So while a single sign-in event could be modelled with a Promise it's meaningless when watching all sign-in/sign-out events.
So fetchCreds is registering to be notified about all sign-in/sign-out events. It doesn't do anything with the returned unsubscribe function, so presumably it'll be listening to all such events until the page is reloaded. If you call fetchCreds multiple times it'll keep adding more and more listeners.
If you're waiting for a user to finish signing in then I suggest waiting for that directly instead. firebase.auth() has various methods starting with the prefix signIn, e.g. signInWithEmailAndPassword, and these do return a Promise that resolves when the user has finished signing in. The resolved value provides access to various information, including the user. I don't know which method you're using but the idea is much the same for all of them.
However, it might be that you're really just interested in grabbing the details of the current user. If that's all you want then you don't need to use onAuthStateChanged at all. You should just be able to grab a copy using the currentUser property. Something like this:
async fetchCreds({ commit }) {
try {
const { uid } = firebase.auth().currentUser
const userDoc = await users.doc(uid).get()
commit('SET_USER', userDoc.data())
} catch (error) {
console.log(error)
commit('SET_USER', {})
}
}
As I've already mentioned, this relies on the assumption that the user is already signed in. If that isn't a safe assumption then you might want to consider waiting until after sign in has completed before creating components that need user credentials.
Update:
Questions from the comments:
If the obj.method() call was asynchronous and we did await the callback function within it, would that ensure that the outer async function (myFn) never resolves before the inner one has finished?
I'm not entirely sure what you're asking here.
Just to be clear, I'm being very careful with my use of the words async and asynchronous. A function such as setTimeout would be considered asynchronous but it is not async.
async/await is just a lot of syntactic sugar around Promises. You don't really wait for a function, you wait for a Promise. When we talk about awaiting an async function we're really talking about waiting for the Promise it returns to resolve.
So when you say await the callback function it's not really clear what that means. Which Promise are you trying to await?
Putting the async modifier on a function doesn't make it magically wait for things. It will only wait when it encounters await. You can still have other asynchronous calls within an async function and, just like with a normal function, these calls will be performed after the function has returned. The only way to 'pause' is to await a Promise.
Putting an await inside another function, even a nested function, won't make any difference to whether the outer function waits unless the outer function is already waiting for the inner function. Behind the scenes this is all just Promises chaining then calls. Whenever you write await you're just adding another then call to a Promise. However, that won't have the desired effect unless that Promise is in the same chain as the Promise returned by the outer async function. It only needs one link to be missing for the chain to fail.
So modifying my earlier example:
async function myFn (obj) {
await obj.method(async function () {
await somePromise
// ...
})
// ...
}
await myFn(x)
Note that there are 3 functions here: myFn, method and the callback passed to method. The question is, will await myFn(x) wait for somePromise?
From the code above we can't actually tell. It would depend on what method does internally. For example, if method looked like this then it still wouldn't work:
function method (callback) {
setTimeout(callback, 1000)
}
Putting async on method won't help, that'll just make it return a Promise but the Promise still won't be waiting for the timer to fire.
Our Promise chain has a broken link. myFn and the callback are both creating their parts of the chain but unless method links those Promises together it won't work.
On the other hand, if method is written to return a suitable Promise that waits for the callback to complete then we will get our target behaviour:
function method (callback) {
return someServerCallThatReturnsAPromise().then(callback)
}
We could have used async/await here instead but there was no need as we can just return the Promise directly.
Also, if in the async myFn function you're not returning anything, does that mean it'll resolve immediately and as undefined?
The term immediately is not well-defined here.
If a function isn't returning anything at the end then it's equivalent to having return undefined at the end.
The Promise returned by an async function will resolve at the point the function returns.
The resolved value for the Promise will be the value returned.
So if you aren't returning anything it will resolve to undefined. Resolving won't happen until the end of the function is reached. If the function doesn't contain any await calls then this will happen 'immediately' in the same sense as a synchronous function returning 'immediately'.
However, await is just syntactic sugar around a then call, and then calls are always asynchronous. So while the Promise might resolve 'immediately' the await still has to wait. It's a very short wait, but it isn't synchronous and other code may get the opportunity to run in the meantime.
Consider the following:
const myFn = async function () {
console.log('here 3')
}
console.log('here 1')
Promise.resolve('hi').then(() => {
console.log('here 4')
})
console.log('here 2')
await myFn()
console.log('here 5')
The log messages will appear in the order they're numbered. So even though myFn resolves 'immediately' you'll still get here 4 jumping in between here 3 and here 5.

To make it short
fetchCreds({ commit }) {
return new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
try {
firebase.auth().onAuthStateChanged(async function(user) {
const { uid } = user
const userDoc = await users.doc(uid).get()
commit('SET_USER', userDoc.data())
resolve()
})
} catch (error) {
console.log(error)
commit('SET_USER', {})
resolve()
}}
}
async () => undefined // returns Promise<undefined> -> undefined resolves immediatly
asnyc () => func(cb) // returns Promise<any> resolves before callback got called
() => new Promise(resolve => func(() => resolve())) // resolves after callback got called

Mobx State Tree Flow. How to Know when it's done?

I am using mobx state tree and mobx for UI Stuff.
Now when I save something to db, after the request is done I want to update the ui(ie my mobx state).
I need to know when the flow is finished.
myFlow: flow(function* () {
// do stuff here.
}),
now I see that a promise is returned, so I thought of just doing
myFlow.then()
which works but I am wondering if this is the property way or if there is another way to do this(async/await? or some internal thing that flow has?)

a flow returns a promise, so any promise waiting mechanism works: .then, await, or yield inside another flow. If you want to render the state of the flow, take a look at mobxUtils.fromPromise(promise).case(....) of the mobx-utils package

Inside generator you can call some another action at the end.
In example below I call thisIsWhatYouNeed function. This function will be called when generator ends.
myFlow: flow(function* () {
try {
const response = yield fetch('your URL here');
const data = yield response.json()
// here you can call another action
self.thisIsWhatYouNeed(data);
} catch (error) {
console.log('error happens');
}
})
thisIsWhatYouNeed(data) {
// here you have your data and know that flow is finished
console.log('generator already finished');
}

Observable determine if subscriber function has finished

What is the best way to determine if the subscriber has finished executing or better yet return something and catch it up-stream? For example:
this._subscriptions.push(this._client
.getCommandStream(this._command) // Returns an IObservable from a Subject stream
.subscribe(msg => {
// Do some processing maybe some promise stuff
http.request(url).then(
// some more stuff
);
});
What's the best know to determine that subscription has finished. I've implemented it as follows:
this._subscriptions.push(this._client
.getCommandStream(this._command)
.subscribe(msg => {
// Do some processing maybe some promise stuff
http.request(url).then(re => {
// some more stuff
msg.done()
}).catch(err => msg.done(err));
});
i.e. added a done method to the object being passed in to determine if this is finished. The issue with that is I'll have to call done in every promise or catch block and find that a little too exhaustive. Is there a cleaner and more automated way of doing this?
I think the examples I've given are not good enough. This implementation is using RX to build an internal messaging bus. The get command stream is actually returning a read-only channel (as an Observable) to get commands and process them. Now the processing could be a http request followed by many other things or just an if statement.
this._client
.getCommandStream(this._command) // Returns an IObservable from a Subject stream
.subscribe(msg => {
// Do some processing maybe some promise stuff
http.request(url).then({
// some more stuff
}).then({
// Here I wanna do some file io
if(x) {
file.read('path', (content) => {
msg.reply(content);
msg.done();
});
} else {
// Or maybe not do a file io or maybe even do some image processing
msg.reply("pong");
msg.done()
}
});
});
I feel like this is a fine usage of the Observable pattern as this is exactly a sequence of commands coming in and this logic would like to act on them. The question is notice msg.done() being called all over the place. I want to know what is the best way to limit that call and know when the entire thing is done. Another option is to wrap it all in a Promise but then again what's the difference between resolve or msg.done()?

Actually, making another asynchronous request inside subscribe() isn't recommended because it just makes things more complicated and using Rx in this way doesn't help you make your code more understandable.
Since you need to make a request to a remote service that returns a PRomise you can merge it into the chain:
this._subscriptions.push(this._client
.getCommandStream(this._command)
.concatMap(msg => http.request(url))
.subscribe(...)
Also the 3rd parameter to subscribe is a callback that is called when the source Observable completes.
You can also add your own teardown logic when the chain is being disposed. This is called after the complete callback in subscribe(...) is called:
const subscription = this._subscriptions.push(this._client
...
.subscribe(...)
subscription.add(() => doWhatever())
Btw, this is equivalent to using the finally() operator.

As per RxJs subscribe method documentation, the last Argument is completed function
var source = Rx.Observable.range(0, 3)
var subscription = source.subscribe(
function (x) {
console.log('Next: %s', x);
},
function (err) {
console.log('Error: %s', err);
},
function () {
console.log('Completed');
});
please refer this documentation
https://github.com/Reactive-Extensions/RxJS/blob/master/doc/api/core/operators/subscribe.md