React Immutability-helper - update many similar objects in array - javascript

I have state in Redux Store and I want to change all isPlaying to false. I do not have idea how I can do that in better way. Here is what I did so far.
const INITIAL_STATE = {
isPlaying: true,
allLangs: [
{
shortName: 'es',
fullName: "spanish",
order: 0,
isPlaying: false
}, {
shortName: 'pt',
fullName: "portuguese",
order: 0,
isPlaying: false
},
{
shortName: 'gb',
fullName: "english",
order: 0,
isPlaying: true
}
]
}
return update(state,
{
$merge: {isPlaying: false},
allLangs: {
[0]: {
$merge: {isPlaying: false}
},
[1]: {
$merge: {isPlaying: false}
},
[2]: {
$merge: {isPlaying: false}
}
}
});
So my question: Is it any way to do this in better way than call to all index separatly ?

Given your current data structure, if you want to set every instance of isPlaying to false, then what you have is correct. Depending on your use case, here are some other suggestions:
Reset to default
Let's say that whenever you set isPlaying to false, the game is over and you are starting a new game. Then, the easiest thing to do might be to just set the state to initialState directly.
Change data structure
This is dependent on your use case, but my first instinct is that your data structure has duplication. Can you really be playing a game in English and Spanish at the same time? If not, consider doing something like this:
const allLangs = {
es: {
fullName: "spanish",
order: 0,
}
}
Then, in yours state, you would point to the active language:
const state = {
isPlaying: false,
activeLanguage: "es"
}
Refactoring in this way gives you one single source of truth.

I would suggest you to take the 'allLangs' array in separate array variable lets say 'newAllLangs' and use map() to change the 'isPlaying' and in the last set this 'newAllLangs' to state. Something like this.
I am considering you are doing this manipulation in userAction.js. So lets say you got allLangs via mapStateToProps and sent this data to userAction.js by using mapDispatchToProps. In userAction.js you can manupulate allLangs and send them back to reducer. And reducer will update store based on what you send from userAction.
This was theoretical part If you want more exposure. You can make a fiddle and can share here.

Related

How can I structure my data better in the redux state?

I'm new to this so it might be a very beginner question but I hope there might be a solution to this for the people who are good.
songData() here returns an array of lots of song objects.
That's why the [0] here in currentSong: { currentSongData: songData()[0] },
This is my redux state:
const initState = {
allSongs: songData(),
currentSong: { currentSongData: songData()[0] },
isPlaying: false,
isLibraryOpen: false,
songTimer: [
{
currentTime: 0,
duration: 0,
},
],
};
Whenever I have to access anything in the currentSong, I have to write something like:
currentSong.currentSongData.name
or if I define the currentSong as currentSong: [songData()[0]], then like:
currentSong[0].name
Is there a better way to define the redux state where I don't have to write such long things when I access the data?
I want to access it by writing
currentSong.name
BTW this is the structure of the song object.
{
name: 'Cold Outside',
cover: 'https://chillhop.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/09fb436604242df99f84b9f359acb046e40d2e9e-1024x1024.jpg',
artist: 'Nymano',
},
You can use property spread notation
currentSong: { ...songData()[0] }
I would favor to store currentSong's key id which you could extract then its data content from allSongs. otherwise, you would be duplicating data something you better avoid. in this way, at initial state you would have currentSongId: songData()[0].id
so how would you handle that at your functions? you can use useSelector. this function allows you to filter your data so you consume it properly. at your function component you would extract like:
// at your component function
const selectedSong = useSelector(state => state.allSongs.filter(({ id }) => id === state.currentSongId))
if you read further below at useSelector docs, you could go a step further and memoize its value to avoid unnecessary rerenders in combination with another library reselect.

How to access an attribute in an object array in Redux state?

I'm very new to Redux, and confused as to how to update nested state.
const initialState = {
feature: '',
scenarios: [{
description: '',
steps: []
}]
}
I know that to just push to an array in an immutable way, we could do,
state = {
scenarios: [...state.scenarios, action.payload]
}
And to push into a specific attribute, as this SO answer suggests
How to access array (object) elements in redux state, we could do
state.scenarios[0].description = action.payload
But my question is, how would we access a particular attribute in an object array without mentioning the index? is there a way for us to push it to the last empty element?
All suggestions are welcome to help me understand, thank you in advance :)
Redux helps to decouple your state transformations and the way you render your data.
Modifying your array only happens inside your reducers. To specify which scenario's description you want to modify is easy to achieve by using an identifier. If your scenario has in id, it should be included in your action, e.g.
{
"type": "update_scenario_description",
"payload": {
"scenario": "your-id",
"description": "New content here"
}
}
You can have a reducer per scenario. The higher level reducer for all scenarios can forward the action to the specific reducer based on the scenario id, so that only this scenario will be updated.
In your ui, you can use the array of scenarios and your scenario id to render only the specific one you're currently viewing.
For a more detailed explanation, have a look at the todo example. This is basically the same, as each todo has an id, you have one reducer for all todos and a specific reducer per todo, which is handled by it's id.
In addition to the accepted answer, I'd like to mention something in case someone still wants to "access a particular attribute in an object array without mentioning the index".
'use strict'
const initialState = {
feature: '',
scenarios: [{
description: '',
steps: []
}]
}
let blank = {}
Object.keys(initialState.scenarios[0]).map(scene => {
if (scene === 'steps'){
blank[scene] = [1, 2]
} else {
blank[scene]=initialState.scenarios[0][scene]
}
})
const finalState = {
...initialState,
scenarios: blank
}
console.log(initialState)
console.log(finalState)
However, if scenarios property of initialState instead of being an object inside an array, had it been a simple object like scenarios:{description:'', steps: []}, the solution would have been much simpler:
'use strict'
const initialState = {
feature: '',
scenarios: {
description: '',
steps: []
}
}
const finalState = {
...initialState,
scenarios: {
...initialState.scenarios, steps: [1, 2, 4]
}
}
console.log(initialState)
console.log(finalState)

Properly returning nested state with Object.assign

I'm working on a React/Redux application and for the most part, everything has been working smoothly.
Essentially, it's a todo application that has categorization built in.
I'm having trouble properly returning the full existing state in my reducer when the user adds a todo-item inside a category.
The redux state before I dispatch the ADD_ITEM action looks like this:
{
items: {
"HOME": [["Do laundry", "High Priority"],["Feed kids", "Low priority"] ],
"WORK": [["Get promotion", "High priority"],["Finish project", "Medium priority"] ],
"BOTH": [["Eat better", "Medium priority"],["Go for a run", "High priority"] ],
},
settings: {
Test: "test"
}
}
The user navigates to a category(pre-made, haven't implemented creating them yet) and can create a new todo-item with a name and a priority. This dispatches an action that returns an array like [category, name, priority].
Currently in my reducer, I have it where it is successfully adding the item, but it is emptying/overwriting all the existing categories.
My reducer looks like this:
case types.ADD_ITEM:
let cat = action.payload[0];
let name = action.payload[1];
let priority = action.payload[2];
return Object.assign({}, state, { items: { [cat]: [...state.items[cat], [name, priority]]}});
I've tried creating a new object first with all the combined items like so:
let combinedItems = Object.assign({}, state.items, { [cat]: [...state.items[cat], action.payload] });
If I console.log the above combinedItems, I get the exact object that I want items to be. However, I'm struggling to have the final object returned by the reducer to reflect that.
When I tried something like below, I got an object that contained combinedItems as a separate key inside items.
return Object.assign({}, state, { items: { combinedItems, [cat]: [...state.items[cat], [name, priority]]}});
Can anyone help me get my final redux state to contain all the existing categories/items + the user added one? I would really appreciate the help.
I think you should use objects in places where you have arrays. In your action payload, instead of:
[category, name, priority]
You can have:
{category, name, priority}
action.payload.category
I would make the same change with your todo items. Instead of:
[["Eat better", "Medium priority"], ... ]
You can have:
[{ name: "Eat better", priority: "Medium" }, ... ]
Now in terms of whether it's better to make items an object with category keys or an array of items that know its category... well I think the latter is better, that way if you get a single item, you don't need to go up to its parent to find out which category it belongs to. It would also make your problem a bit more manageable.
items: [
{
name: "Eat better",
priority: "Medium",
category: "Both"
}, ...
]
Putting this all together to solve your problem:
case types.ADD_ITEM:
let newItem = {
name: action.payload.name,
priority: action.payload.priority,
category: action.payload.category
}
return Object.assign({}, state, { items: [ ...state.items, newItem ] })
Whatever benefit you had before with categories as keys are trivial to reproduce with this structure.
Get all items in the HOME category:
this.props.items.filter(item => item.category === 'HOME')

Redux see other state from Reducer

Imagine a UI with two React components:
<FilterContainer />
<UserListContainer />
We pull down an array of users from the server:
[
{
name: 'John',
enjoys: ['Sailing', 'Running']
},
{
name: 'Bob',
enjoys: ['Running', 'Eating']
},
{
name: 'Frank',
enjoys: ['Sailing', 'Eating']
}
]
The UI looks a little like this:
Filter: Sailing Running Eating
UserList:
John
Frank
You can click on either a filter or a user. To get to this stage, we've clicked on 'Sailing' and then on 'Frank' (maybe we see a nice photo of Frank in the middle of the screen).
My Redux state, built using combineReducers, looks like this:
{
ui: {
filter: {enjoys: 'Sailing'},
userList: {selected: 'John'}
}
data: [user array]
}
I have two actions, SELECT_USER and SELECT_FILTER.
When I click on a filter (SELECT_FILTER fires), I want the ui.userList.selected to persist if that user is still in the filter, and the ui.userList.selected to be set to null if the user is not in the filter.
So if I now click on Eating, I'll see a list with Bob and Frank in it, and Frank is selected. But if I click on Running, I'll see John and Bob, but neither are selected.
However I'm struggling to do this in the conventional Redux methodology. When the userList reducer sees the SELECT_FILTER action, there's no way for it to check the data state to see if the currently selected user is still in that filter condition or not.
What's the right way to do this?
function filter(state = {enjoys: null}, action) {
switch (action.type) {
case SELECT_FILTER:
return {
...state,
enjoys: action.enjoys
}
default:
return state
}
}
function userList(state = {selected: null}, action) {
switch (action.type) {
case SELECT_USER:
return {
...state,
selected: action.name
}
default:
return state
}
}
const ui = combineReducers({
filter,
userList
})
let initialUsers = [
{
name: 'John',
enjoys: ['Sailing', 'Running']
},
{
name: 'Bob',
enjoys: ['Running', 'Eating']
},
{
name: 'Frank',
enjoys: ['Sailing', 'Eating']
}
]
const rootReducer = combineReducers({
ui,
data: (state=initialUsers) => state // in reality, loaded from server
})
export default rootReducer
Reducer should be aware only of a small part of state.
Good place for described logic is the action creator. With redux-thunk you will be able to make a decision based on a global state.
function selectFilter(enjoys) {
return (dispatch, getState) => {
dispatch({type: SELECT_FILTER, enjoys});
// if getState().ui.userList.selected exists in getState().data
dispatch({type: SELECT_USER, name: null});
}
};
You need another action for this.
If you are filtering the users in the data reducer, you will need to dispatch an action in one of your components' hooks (componentWillUpdate or componentWillReceiveProps) when you detect that the array of users has changed. This action will provide your filter reducer with the current array of users, and there you can set the selected field as you like.
If you are filtering the users in the server, I guess you already have an action like FETCH_USERS_SUCCESS that you can use for this.
It should be handled by the filter reducer. You need to send the users data as part of the action payload. Hence the reducer could Calc the selected user logic. You should consider adding a new action, as #cuttals suggested.

Updating nested data in redux store

What's the best/correct way to update a nested array of data in a store using redux?
My store looks like this:
{
items:{
1: {
id: 1,
key: "value",
links: [
{
id: 10001
data: "some more stuff"
},
...
]
},
...
}
}
I have a pair of asynchronous actions that updates the complete items object but I have another pair of actions that I want to update a specific links array.
My reducer currently looks like this but I'm not sure if this is the correct approach:
switch (action.type) {
case RESOURCE_TYPE_LINK_ADD_SUCCESS:
// TODO: check whether the following is acceptable or should we create a new one?
state.items[action.resourceTypeId].isSourceOf.push(action.resourceTypeLink);
return Object.assign({}, state, {
items: state.items,
});
}
Jonny's answer is correct (never mutate the state given to you!) but I wanted to add another point to it. If all your objects have IDs, it's generally a bad idea to keep the state shape nested.
This:
{
items: {
1: {
id: 1,
links: [{
id: 10001
}]
}
}
}
is a shape that is hard to update.
It doesn't have to be this way! You can instead store it like this:
{
items: {
1: {
id: 1,
links: [10001]
}
},
links: {
10001: {
id: 10001
}
}
}
This is much easier for update because there is just one canonical copy of any entity. If you need to let user “edit a link”, there is just one place where it needs to be updated—and it's completely independent of items or anything other referring to links.
To get your API responses into such a shape, you can use normalizr. Once your entities inside the server actions are normalized, you can write a simple reducer that merges them into the current state:
import merge from 'lodash/object/merge';
function entities(state = { items: {}, links: {} }, action) {
if (action.response && action.response.entities) {
return merge({}, state, action.response.entities);
}
return state;
}
Please see Redux real-world example for a demo of such approach.
React's update() immutability helper is a convenient way to create an updated version of a plain old JavaScript object without mutating it.
You give it the source object to be updated and an object describing paths to the pieces which need to be updated and changes that need to be made.
e.g., if an action had id and link properties and you wanted to push the link to an array of links in an item keyed with the id:
var update = require('react/lib/update')
// ...
return update(state, {
items: {
[action.id]: {
links: {$push: action.link}
}
}
})
(Example uses an ES6 computed property name for action.id)

Categories

Resources