Subscriptions with react-meteor-data - javascript

From the docs, I wrote my container like so
export default InventoryItemsList = createContainer(() => {
const itemsCollection = Meteor.subscribe('allInventoryItems');
const loading = !itemsCollection.ready();
return {
loading,
items: !loading ? InventoryItems.find().fetch() : []
};
}, class InventoryItemsListComponent extends Component {
render() {
let items = this.props.items;
/* some render logic */
return /*... react component template ...*/ ;
}
});
The problem I see is that
The container function is executed many times, thus calling Meteor.subscribe more than once; is that good? Will Meteor just ignore subsequent subscriptions?
According to this tutorial, subscriptions need to be stopped, but the docs do not mention it at all. This does not take care on it's own, does it?
What is the recommended way to stop (i.e. unsubscribe) or resolve the 2 issues that I see from that point?
Is TrackerRact actually better? (yes, I know this is opinionated, but surely there is some form of a convention with meteor react, here!)

1) The container component is a reactive component, so whenever documents are changed or added to the given collection, it's going to call via your container and update the DOM.
2) As far as I know, the container will only subscribe to the collection via the actual component you bind it to. Once you leave that component, the subscriptions should stop.
If you want to unsubscribe directly, you can just call this.props.items.stop() in your componentWillUnmount() method.
Finally, I will have to say that using React specific implementations are always better than using Meteor specific functions (i.e. it's always better to use state variables over Sessions with React, as it's always better to use containers than Tracker.autorun() with React, etc, etc).

About your problem 2), this is how I solve it
1- When you subscribe to something, store those subscriptions references and pass them to the component.
Here an example with 2 subscriptions, but subscribing to only 1, is even easier.
createContainer((props) =>{
const subscription = Meteor.subscribe('Publication1', props.param1);
const subscription2 = Meteor.subscribe('Publication2', props.param1, props.param2);
const loading = !(subscription.ready() && subscription2.ready());
const results1 = loading ? undefined : Collection1.find().fetch();
const results2 = loading ? undefined : Collection2.findOne({a:1});
return {subscriptions: [subscription, subscription2], loading, results1, results2};
}, MyComp);
Then in my component:
class MyComp extends Component {
......
componentWillUnmount() {
this.props.subscriptions.forEach((s) =>{
s.stop();
});
}
....
}
This way, the component will get in props.subscriptions all the subscriptions it needs to stop before unmounting.
Also you can use this.props.loading to know if the subscriptions are ready (of course, you can have 2 different ready1 and ready2 if it helps).
Last thing, after subscribing, if you .find(), dont forget to .fetch(), else the results will not be reactive.

Related

How to give react components dynamic ids, when React runs code twice?

It's a known React behavior that code runs twice.
However, I'm creating a form builder in which I need to be able to give each form input a dynamic Id and use that Id for a lot of other purposes later. Here's a simple code of an input:
const Text = ({placeholder}) => {
const [id, setId] = useState(Math.random());
eventEmitter.on('global-event', () => {
var field = document.querySelector(`#${id}`); // here, id is changed
});
}
But since Math.random() is a side-effect, it's called twice and I can't create dynamic ids for my form fields.
The reason I'm using document.querySelector can be read here.
My question is, how can I create consistent dynamic ids for my inputs?
It seems you think that useState(Math.random()); is the side-effect causing you issue, but only functions passed to useState are double-invoked.
I think the issue you have is that the eventEmitter.on call is the unintentional side-effect since the function component body is also double invoked.
Strict mode can’t automatically detect side effects for you, but it
can help you spot them by making them a little more deterministic.
This is done by intentionally double-invoking the following functions:
Class component constructor, render, and shouldComponentUpdate methods
Class component static getDerivedStateFromProps method
Function component bodies <-- this
State updater functions (the first argument to setState)
Functions passed to useState, useMemo, or useReducer <-- not this
To remedy this I believe you should place the eventEmitter.on logic into an useEffect hook with a dependency on the id state. You should also probably use id values that are guaranteed a lot more uniqueness. Don't forget to return a cleanup function from the effect to remove any active event "listeners", either when id updates, or when the component unmounts. This is to help clear out any resource leaks (memory, sockets, etc...).
Example:
import { v4 as uuidV4 } from 'uuid';
const Text = ({placeholder}) => {
const [id, setId] = useState(uuidV4());
useEffect(() => {
const handler = () => {
let field = document.querySelector(`#${id}`);
};
eventEmitter.on('global-event', handler);
return () => {
eventEmitter.removeListener('global-event', handler);
};
}, [id]);
...
}

Update context when state object mutates

I have a PageContext that is holding the state of User objects as array. Each User object contains a ScheduledPost object that does mutate when user decides to add a new post. I have no idea how to trigger an update on my PageContext when it happens (I want to avoid forceUpdate() call). I need to somehow be notified of that, in order to re-render posts, maintain timer etc.
Please, see the code:
class User {
name: string;
createTime: number;
scheduledPosts: ScheduledPost[] = [];
/*
* Creates a new scheduled post
*/
public createScheduledPost(title : string, content : string, date : number): void {
this.scheduledPosts.push(Object.assign(new ScheduledPost(), {
title,
content,
date
}));
}
}
class ScheduledPost {
title: string;
content: string;
date: number;
public load(): void {
// Create timers etc.
}
public publish(): void {
// Publish post
}
}
// PageContext/index.tsx
export default React.createContext({
users: [],
editingUser: null,
setEditingUser: (user: User) => {}
});
// PageContextProvider.tsx
const PageContextProvider: React.FC = props => {
const [users, setUsers] = useState<User[]>([]);
const [editingUser, setEditingUser] = useState<User>(null);
// Load users
useEffect(() => {
db.getUsers()
.then(result => setUsers(result));
}, []);
return (
<PageContext.Provider value={{
users,
editingUser,
setEditingUser
}}>
{props.children}
</PageContext.Provider>
);
};
What I would like to achieve is, when consuming my provider with useContext hook:
const ctx = useContext(PageContext);
I would like to create a schedule post from any component like so:
// Schedule post (1 hour)
ctx.editingUser.createScheduledPost("My post title", "The post content", (new Date).getTime() + 1 * 60 * 60);
However, this wont work, since React doesn't know that User property has just mutated.
Questions:
How can I make React being notified of the changes within any of the User object instance? What is the way to solve it properly (excluding forceUpdate)?
Am I doing it right? I'm new to React and I feel like the structure I'm using here is cumbersome and just not right.
Where are the users being mutated? If you're storing them in your state as it appears, the changes should be detected. However if you're using the methods built into the User class to let them directly update themselves, then React will not pick up on them. You would need to update the entire users array in your state to make sure React can respond to the changes.
It's tough to give a more specific example without seeing exactly where/how you're updating your users currently, but a generalized mutation might go something like this (you can still use a class method, if desired):
const newUsers = Array.from(users); // Deep copy users array to prevent direct state mutation.
newUsers[someIndex].createScheduledPost(myTitle, myContent, myDate);
setUsers(newUsers); // Calling the setX function tied to your useState call will automatically trigger updates/re-renders for all (unless otherwise specified) components/operations that depend on it
In React re-render is caused by calling setState within component (or by using hooks, but the point is that you need to call specific method) or by changing component props. That means that manual mutation of your state will never cause a re-render - even if you had simple component and called
this.state.something = somethingElse;
re-render would not occur. Same thing works for context.
For your case, this means that you should not mutate editingUser state, but call setEditingUser with changed user state, something like:
const user = { ...ctx.editingUser };
user.createScheduledPost("My post title", "The post content", (new Date).getTime() + 1 * 60 * 60);
ctx.setEditingUser(user);
I'm not sure about your inner structure, but if that same user is also in users array, then you'll need to update that part of state by calling setUsers method where you maintain whole array and only update that single user which changed data - if thats the case then I'd think about restructuring the app because it already gets complicated for such simple state changes. You should also consider using redux, mobx or some other state management library instead of react context (my personal advice).
EDIT
Please take a look at this quite:
In a typical React application, data is passed top-down (parent to
child) via props, but this can be cumbersome for certain types of
props (e.g. locale preference, UI theme) that are required by many
components within an application. Context provides a way to share
values like these between components without having to explicitly pass
a prop through every level of the tree.
As you can see, react team is suggesting using context for some global preferences that are required within many components. The main problem with using context (in my opinion) is that you don't write natural react components - they don't receive dependant data through props but rather from within the context api itself. This means that you won't be able to reuse your components without also integrating context part of application.
While for example redux has similar concept of keeping state at one place, it still propagades that state (and its changes) to components via props, making your components undependent of both redux, context or anything else.
You can stick to react context and make whole app work with it, but I'm just saying it wouldn't be best practice to do so.

How can we implement componentWillUnmount using react hooks?

The method componentWillUnmount() is invoked immediately before a component is unmounted and destroyed. If we use useEffect with an empty array ([]) as the second argument and put our function in return statement it will be executed after the component is unmounted and even after another component will be mounted. This is done for performance reasons as far as I understand. In order not to delay rendering.
So the question is - how can we call some function using hooks before a component gets unmounted?
What I am trying to do is an application which saves user's input as he types (without submitting form). I use setInterval to save updated text every N seconds. And I need to force save updates before the component will unmount. I don't want to use prompt by react router before navigating. This is an electron application. I appreciate any thoughts or advice on how to implement such functionality.
Update
Unfortunately, Effects with Cleanup run after letting the browser paint. More details can be found here: So What About Cleanup?. It basically means that cleanup is run after a component is unmounted and it is not the same as executing code in componentWillUnmount(). I can clearly see the sequence of calls if I put console.log statements in the cleanup code and in another component. The question is whether we can execute some code before a component is unmounted using hooks.
Update2
As I can see I should better describe my use case. Let's imagine a theoretical app which holds its data in a Redux store. And we have two components with some forms. For simplicity, we don't have any backend or any async logic. We use only Redux store as data storage.
We don't want to update Redux store on every keystroke. So we keep actual values in the local component's state which we initialize with values from the store when a component mounts. We also create an effect which sets up a setInterval for 1s.
We have the following process. A User types something. Updates are stored in the local component state until our setInterval callback is called. The callback just puts data in the store (dispatches action). We put our callback in the useEffect return statement to force save to store when the component gets unmounted because we want to save data to store in this case as soon as possible.
The problem comes when a user types something in the first component and immediately goes to the second component (faster than 1s). Since the cleanup in our first component will be called after re-rendering, our store won't be updated before the second component gets mounted. And because of that, the second component will get outdated values to its local state.
If we put our callback in componentWillUnmount() it will be called before unmounting and the store will be updated before the next component mounts. So can we implement this using hooks?
componentWillUnmount can be simulated by returning a function inside the useEffect hook. The returned function will be called just before every rerendering of the component. Strictly speaking, this is the same thing but you should be able to simulate any behaviour you want using this.
useEffect(() => {
const unsubscribe = api.createSubscription()
return () => unsubscribe()
})
Update
The above will run every time there is a rerender. However, to simulate the behaviour only on mounting and unmounting (i.e. componentDidMount and componentWillUnmount). useEffect takes a second argument which needs to be an empty array.
useEffect(() => {
const unsubscribe = api.createSubscription()
return () => unsubscribe()
}, [])
See a more detailed explanation of the same question here.
Since the introduction of the useLayoutEffect hook, you can now do
useLayoutEffect(() => () => {
// Your code here.
}, [])
to simulate componentWillUnmount. This runs during unmount, but before the element has actually left the page.
The question here is how do you run code with hooks BEFORE unmount? The return function with hooks runs AFTER unmount and whilst that doesn’t make a difference for most use cases, their are some where it is a critical difference.
Having done a bit of investigation on this, I have come to the conclusion that currently hooks simply does not provide a direct alternative to componentWillUnmount. So if you have a use case that needs it, which is mainly for me at least, the integration of non-React libs, you just have to do it the old way and use a component.
Update: see the answer below about UseLayoutEffect() which looks like it may solve this issue.
I agree with Frank, but the code needs to look like this otherwise it will run only on the first render:
useLayoutEffect(() => {
return () => {
// Your code here.
}
}, [])
This is equivalent to ComponentWillUnmount
Similar to #pritam's answer, but with an abstracted code example. The whole idea of useRef is to allow you to keep track of the changes to the callback and not have a stale closure at the time of execution. Hence, the useEffect at the bottom can have an empty dependency array to ensure it only runs when the component unmounts. See the code demo.
Reusable hook:
type Noop = () => void;
const useComponentWillUnmount = (callback: Noop) => {
const mem = useRef<Noop>();
useEffect(() => {
mem.current = callback;
}, [callback]);
useEffect(() => {
return () => {
const func = mem.current as Noop;
func();
};
}, []);
};
After a bit of research, found that - you could still accomplish this. Bit tricky but should work.
You can make use of useRef and store the props to be used within a closure such as render useEffect return callback method
function Home(props) {
const val = React.useRef();
React.useEffect(
() => {
val.current = props;
},
[props]
);
React.useEffect(() => {
return () => {
console.log(props, val.current);
};
}, []);
return <div>Home</div>;
}
DEMO
However a better way is to pass on the second argument to useEffect so that the cleanup and initialisation happens on any change of desired props
React.useEffect(() => {
return () => {
console.log(props.current);
};
}, [props.current]);
I got in a unique situation where the useEffect(() => () => { ... }, []); answers did not work for me. This is because my component never got rendered — I was throwing an exception before I could register the useEffect hook.
function Component() {
useEffect(() => () => { console.log("Cleanup!"); }, []);
if (promise) throw promise;
if (error) throw error;
return <h1>Got value: {value}</h1>;
}
In the above example, by throwing a Promise<T> that tells react to suspend until the promise is resolved. However, once the promise is resolved, an error is thrown. Since the component never gets rendered and goes straight to an ErrorBoundary, the useEffect() hook is never registered!
If you're in a similar situation as myself, this little code may help:
To solve this, I modified my ErrorBoundary code to run a list of teardowns once it was recovered
export default class ErrorBoundary extends Component {
// ...
recover() {
runTeardowns();
// ...
}
// ...
}
Then, I created a useTeardown hook which would add teardowns that needed to be ran, or make use of useEffect if possible. You'll most likely need to modify it if you have nesting of error boundaries, but for my simple usecase, it worked wonderfully.
import React, { useEffect, useMemo } from "react";
const isDebugMode = import.meta.env.NODE_ENV === "development";
const teardowns: (() => void)[] = [];
export function runTeardowns() {
const wiped = teardowns.splice(0, teardowns.length);
for (const teardown of wiped) {
teardown();
}
}
type Teardown = { registered?: boolean; called?: boolean; pushed?: boolean } & (() => unknown);
/**
* Guarantees a function to run on teardown, even when errors occur.
*
* This is necessary because `useEffect` only runs when the component doesn't throw an error.
* If the component throws an error before anything renders, then `useEffect` won't register a
* cleanup handler to run. This hook **guarantees** that a function is called when the component ends.
*
* This works by telling `ErrorBoundary` that we have a function we would like to call on teardown.
* However, if we register a `useEffect` hook, then we don't tell `ErrorBoundary` that.
*/
export default function useTeardown(onTeardown: () => Teardown, deps: React.DependencyList) {
// We have state we need to maintain about our teardown that we need to persist
// to other layers of the application. To do that, we store state on the callback
// itself - but to do that, we need to guarantee that the callback is stable. We
// achieve this by memoizing the teardown function.
const teardown = useMemo(onTeardown, deps);
// Here, we register a `useEffect` hook to run. This will be the "happy path" for
// our teardown function, as if the component renders, we can let React guarantee
// us for the cleanup function to be ran.
useEffect(() => {
// If the effect gets called, that means we can rely on React to run our cleanup
// handler.
teardown.registered = true;
return () => {
if (isDebugMode) {
// We want to ensure that this impossible state is never reached. When the
// `runTeardowns` function is called, it should only be ran for teardowns
// that have not been able to be hook into `useEffect`.
if (teardown.called) throw new Error("teardown already called, but unregistering in useEffect");
}
teardown();
if (isDebugMode) {
// Because `teardown.registered` will already cover the case where the effect
// handler is in charge of running the teardown, this isn't necessary. However,
// this helps us prevent impossible states.
teardown.called = true;
}
};
}, deps);
// Here, we register the "sad path". If there is an exception immediately thrown,
// then the `useEffect` cleanup handler will never be ran.
//
// We rely on the behavior that our custom `ErrorBoundary` component will always
// be rendered in the event of errors. Thus, we expect that component to call
// `runTeardowns` whenever it deems it appropriate to run our teardowns.
// Because `useTeardown` will get called multiple times, we want to ensure we only
// register the teardown once.
if (!teardown.pushed) {
teardown.pushed = true;
teardowns.push(() => {
const useEffectWillCleanUpTeardown = teardown.registered;
if (!useEffectWillCleanUpTeardown) {
if (isDebugMode) {
// If the useEffect handler was already called, there should be no way to
// re-run this teardown. The only way this impossible state can be reached
// is if a teardown is called multiple times, which should not happen during
// normal execution.
const teardownAlreadyCalled = teardown.called;
if (teardownAlreadyCalled) throw new Error("teardown already called yet running it in runTeardowns");
}
teardown();
if (isDebugMode) {
// Notify that this teardown has been called - useful for ensuring that we
// cannot reach any impossible states.
teardown.called = true;
}
}
});
}
}
It does not matter wether the returned function from useEffect gets called before or after the component unmounted: You still have access to the states valuey through the closure:
const [input, setInput] = useState(() => Store.retrieveInput());
useEffect(() => {
return () => Store.storeInput(input); // < you can access "input" here, even if the component unmounted already
}, []);
If you don't manage the input in the components state, your whole structure is broken and should be changed to manage state at the right place. In your case, you should lift the shared input state of the components to the parent.
ReactJS docs on hooks specify this:
Effects may also optionally specify how to “clean up” after them by
returning a function.
So any function you return in your useEffect hook, will be executed when the component unmounts, as well as before re-running the effect due to a subsequent render.

Call componentDidMount when API responds

In my project I have a call to an action that makes a webservice call and in turn dispatch actions to the result of the ws, these actions edit the store.
My problem is in :
ComponentDidUpdate () {
If (this.props.messages.length) {
Const items = this.props.messages.filter (this.isDisplayable);
This.timer = setInterval (() => {
If (items.length> 0) {
This.props.popItem (items);
} Else {
ClearInterval (this.timer);
}
}, This.props.interval);
}
}
In fact it is launched several times and I have warnings of
Warning: flattenChildren (...): Encountered two children with the same
key, 1. Child keys must be unique; When two children share a key,
only the first child will be used.
I used the componentDidMount but it launches it before api responds.
my question is:
Is that there is a way to update the component only at the response of my action, or alternatively to pass the warnings ?
try this :
componentWillReceiveProps(nextProps) {
if (this.props.messages === nextProps.messages) return;
i had some probleme and i resolve it by force update
forceUpdate () {
If (this.props.messages.length) {
...
}
}
In my project I have a call to an action that makes a webservice call and in turn dispatch actions to the result of the ws, these actions edit the store.
None of the methods componentDidMount and componentDidUpdate are good.
Observe the Store in Redux and update your component accordingly when the correct action TYPE is found.
Since you are using the Redux architecture, the state for all your components is in a single place — in the Store.
yes i know, but the problem is that componentDidUpdate is called several times which gives me the index error.
This is quite normal in React. Check this lifecycle.
What you should do is the govern the Redux architecture.
I will try today to provide some diagrams for you.
In general, anything you do will be from the global Store.
You may forget the React.Component state, and props you had in the non-Redux applications.
You typically need to use the Wrapper as a context provider around your app, where the context is the property of React.Component.
The context will be passed to all children and grandchildren so this will be the global Store organization.
Then you will need to read the Store from the context, and call the two typical methods: dispatch and subscribe.

React + Redux, How to render not after each dispatch, but after several?

I am trying to make multiple changes to the store, but not render till all changes are done. I wanted to do this with redux-thunk.
Here is my action creator:
function addProp(name, value) {
return { type:'ADD_PROP', name, value }
}
function multiGeoChanges(...changes) {
// my goal here is to make multiple changes to geo, and make sure that react doesnt update the render till the end
return async function(dispatch, getState) {
for (let change of changes) {
dispatch(change);
await promiseTimeout(2000);
}
}
}
I dispatch my async action creator like this:
store.dispatch(multiGeoChanges(addProp(1, "val1"), addProp(2, "val2"), addProp(3, "val3")));
However this is causing react to render after each dispatch. I am new to redux-thunk, I never used async middleware, but I thought it could help me here.
#Kokovin Vladislav's answer is correct. To add some additional context:
Redux will notify all subscribers after every dispatch. To cut down on re-renders, either dispatch fewer times, or use one of several approaches for "batching" dispatches and notifications. For more info, see the Redux FAQ on update events: http://redux.js.org/docs/faq/Performance.html#performance-update-events .
I also recently wrote a couple of blog posts that relate to this topic. Idiomatic Redux: Thoughts on Thunks, Sagas, Abstraction, and Reusability discusses the pros and cons of using thunks, and summarizes several ways to handle batching of dispatches. Practical Redux Part 6: Connected Lists, Forms, and Performance describes several key aspects to be aware of regarding Redux performance.
Finally, there's several other libraries that can help with batching up store change notifications. See the Store#Store Change Subscriptions section of my Redux addons catalog for a list of relevant addons. In particular, you might be interested in https://github.com/manaflair/redux-batch , which will allow you to dispatch an array of actions with only a single notification event.
There are ways to achieve the goal:
Classic way:
usually:
Actions describe the fact that something happened, but don't specify how the application's state changes in response. This is the job of reducers.
That also means that actions are not setters.
Thus, you could describe what has happened and accumulate changes, and dispatch one action
something like:
const multipleAddProp = (changedProps) =>({
type:'MULTIPLE_ADD_PROP', changedProps
});
And then react on action in reducer:
const geo=(state,action)=>{
...
switch (action.type){
case 'MULTIPLE_ADD_PROP':
// apply new props
...
}
}
Another way When rerendering is critical :
then you can consider to limit components, which could be rerendered on state change.
For example you can use shouldComponentUpdate to check whether component
should be rendered or not.
Also you could use reselect, in order to not rerender connected components
after calculating derived data...
Non standard way:
redux-batched-action
It works something like transaction.
In this example, the subscribers would be notified once:
import { batchActions } from 'redux-batched-actions';
const multiGeoChanges=(...arrayOfActions)=> dispatch => {
dispatch( batchActions(arrayOfActions) );
}
In react-redux 7.0.1+ batching is now built-in. Release notes of 7.0.1:
https://github.com/reduxjs/react-redux/releases/tag/v7.0.1
Batched Updates
React has an unstable_batchedUpdates API that it uses to group
together multiple updates from the same event loop tick. The React
team encouraged us to use this, and we've updated our internal Redux
subscription handling to leverage this API. This should also help
improve performance, by cutting down on the number of distinct renders
caused by a Redux store update.
function myThunk() {
return (dispatch, getState) => {
// should only result in one combined re-render, not two
batch(() => {
dispatch(increment());
dispatch(increment());
})
}
}
By design when the state, which is held by the store, changes the view should render.
You can avoid this by updating the state once.
If you are using promises you can use Promise.all to wait for all the promises to resolve and then dispatch a new action to the store with the calculated result. https://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Global_Objects/Promise/all
Something like this:
Promise.all([p1, p2, p3, p4, p5]).then(changes => {
dispatch(changes)
}, err => {
// deal with error
});
Of course you'll need an action that will deal with many props, something like addManyProps this should update the state once, resulting in one render.
redux-batched-actions
Batching action creator and associated higher order reducer for redux that enables batching subscriber notifications for an array of actions.
Coming to this a bit late, but I think this is a much nicer solution, which enables you to add meta.batch to actions you would like to batch together into a single react update. As a bonus this approach works with asynchronous actions.
import raf from 'raf'
import { batchedSubscribe } from 'redux-batched-subscribe'
let notify = null
let rafId = null
const shouldBatch = action => action?.meta?.batch
export const batchedSubscribeEnhancer = batchedSubscribe(freshNotify => (notify = freshNotify))
export const batchedSubscribeMiddleware = () => next => action => {
const resolved = next(action)
if (notify && rafId === null && !shouldBatch(action)) {
notify()
} else if (!rafId) {
rafId = raf(() => {
rafId = null
notify()
})
}
return resolved
}
Then connect up to your store
mport { applyMiddleware, compose, createStore } from 'redux'
import { batchedSubscribeMiddleware, batchedSubscribeEnhancer } from './batching'
const store = createStore(
reducer,
intialState,
compose(
batchedSubscribeEnhancer,
applyMiddleware(batchedSubscribeMiddleware)
)
)

Categories

Resources