I am aware there are similar issues but none of them helped me to fix mine.
So here is my issue.
I am working with react native and using the flux dispatcher. Dispatch and register of my app dispatcher works fine. My issue is that when I want to change/set the state inside the dispatch register function I always get the error message that this.setState() is not a function. Of course I thought this must be a binding issue then (writing in es6), so I tried all sorts of binding "this" but I still can't get it work. Has anyone any idea why?
Here is that bit of code that doesn't work:
testDispatcher() {
AppDispatcher.register( (action) => {
if ( action.action === TEST_ACTION ) {
// I tried setting state inside here
this.setState({
view: action.view
}).bind(this); // with or without this bind doesn't make a difference
// I also tried having a function outside of this function where I set the state.. this doesn't work either.
//this.updateView('home').bind(this);
console.log('dispatch register');
}
});
}
I also tried to console log "this" inside my register function and "this" does return my app class.
The => binds this to the scope of testDispatcher(). That's probably not what you want. In this case I think you should drop the => notation but simply a regular anonymous function.
Also, this.setState(...args...).bind(this) is totally wrong. 1) The this. part indicates that the .bind(this) is redundant. 2) The syntax for binding is like: foo.setState.bind(notFoo, ...args...).
My class didn't extend from React Component, therefore this.setState was not a function.
Related
I'm trying to have a component call a function from another component but just from
inside the setup.
I've read this from vuemastery https://www.vuemastery.com/blog/understanding-vue-3-expose/
and I see that you can accomplish this like this:
methods: {
reset () {
this.$refs.counter.reset()
},
terminate () {
this.$refs.counter.terminate()
}
}
however, I don't have access to those methods inside the setup, and I also can't use this.$refs inside the setup. Is there a way I can do the same thing inside setup, or a way to access these methods inside the setup?
Those methods are undefined in setup, and I cannot access data setup from within those functions, and I cannot use $refs in setup.
The $refs is a very easy way to call a function from another component - but I can't seem to find a relatively easy way to do this with vue3 composition api - am I missing something?
Hey I figured it out https://vuejs.org/guide/essentials/template-refs.html#accessing-the-refs
If I go
<script>
export default {
setup(props) {
const counter = ref(null);
//now I have access to counter.value.reset after it's mounted
counter.value.reset(); //does not work! it's null here
onMounted(() => {
counter.value.reset(); //here it works
})
//make sure to return counter in return
looks like there is an easy way to do this in setup just has a caveat
you cant just call it right away because setup happens before mounted https://vuejs.org/guide/essentials/lifecycle.html
I am calling it on a trigger - so if someone selects something from a dropdown I am watching the v-model and am able to call it there no problem.
Thanks for all the input.
Putting this answer here in case anyone else needs to accomplish the same thing
Suppose we have a method inside a class like this
class Blog extends Component {
postClicked = (id) => {
this.setState({selectedPostId: id})
}
render () {
const newPosts = this.state.posts.map(el => {
return <Post key={el.id}
title={el.title}
author={el.author}
onClick={this.postClicked(el.id)}/>
})
return
//something
{post}
}
}
}
Now, What is the difference between calling the handler like this
onClick={this.postClicked(el.id)} and onClick={() => this.postClicked(el.id)}
Would appreciate if someone can tell me the difference in general
after Ecmascript 6 javascript was introduced with is arrow function link
here ()==>{//code} is a similar as a function() or anonymous function
tell me if you find out what you want
The first option, "this.postClicked(el.id)", will actually call the method, "this.postClicked", with the "el.id" argument, each time the component renders (probably not what's intended).
The second option, "() => this.postClicked(el.id)", will only call the method, "this.postClicked", with the "el.id" argument, when "Post" is clicked.
Overall, if you can find a way to put the "el.id" argument into an "id" or "name" prop on the component
<Post id={el.id} />
then you can do:
<Post
id={el.id}
onClick={this.postClicked}
/>
this.postClicked = (event) => {
const { id } = event.target;
...
}
This last option avoids the use of an unnamed function. If you use an unnamed function, it will cause unnecessary re-renders. React cannot tell that an unnamed function is the same when it's checking whether or not it should re-render, by considering if the props of a component have changed. It considers the unnamed functions to be a new prop each time it checks, causing an unnecessary re-render each time.
Overall, it won't break your app, but it slows down performance slightly if you do it enough. It comes up especially if you start using React Motion (you'll really notice a difference there). It's best to avoid unnamed functions if possible.
you can read this blog it wil clear the things https://medium.com/#machnicki/handle-events-in-react-with-arrow-functions-ede88184bbb
Differences are,
First method is a wrong implementation and it wont give the intended result, where as second one will work.
In the first method you are making a function call, in second one you are assigning a function's signature to onClick.
It is like the combination of below two statements.
var variableName = function(){//some content};
onClick={variableName}
It looks like you question has already been answered. Just a side note though: remember that when assigning your method with an arrow function
onClick={ () => this.method() }
a new anonymous function is created on every re-render. So if the method doesn't need any arguments, it's better to reference the method directly (without parentheses so it's not invoked).
onClick={ this.method }
The first will call the function every time render is done.
The second will do what you want - call it onClick.
I have a container that I need to change the UI form showing the form or showing a success page.
The container has a state.showSuccess and I need the MyFormModule to be able to call the container to change the state.
The below code works but I'm getting the following warning:
JSX props should not use .bind()
How can I get this to work without using .bind()?
...
const myPage = class extends React.Component {
state = { showSuccess: false };
showSuccess() {
this.setState({
showSuccess: true,
});
}
render() {
const { showSuccess } = this.state;
if (showSuccess) {...}
....
<MyFormModule showSuccess={this.showSuccess.bind(this)} />
You should first understand WHY this is a bad practice.
The main reason here, is that .bind is returning a new function reference.
This will happen on each render call, which may lead to a performance hit.
You got 2 options:
Use the constructor to bind your handlers (this will run only once).
constructor(props) {
super(props);
this.showSuccess = this.showSuccess.bind(this);
}
Or create your handlers with arrow functions so they will use the
lexical context for this, hence you won't need to bind them at
all (you will need a babel plugin):
showSuccess = () => {
this.setState({
showSuccess: true,
});
}
You should not use this pattern (as others suggested):
showSuccess={() => this.showSuccess()}
Because this will as well create a new function on each render.
So you may bypass the warning but you are still writing your code in a bad practice design.
From the ESLint docs:
A bind call or arrow function in a JSX prop will create a brand new
function on every single render. This is bad for performance, as it
will result in the garbage collector being invoked way more than is
necessary. It may also cause unnecessary re-renders if a brand new
function is passed as a prop to a component that uses reference
equality check on the prop to determine if it should update.
Use an arrow function when defining showSuccess
showSuccess = () => {
this.setState({
showSuccess: true,
});
}
Use an arrow function since they automatically inherit the this context of wherever they are defined.
showSuccess={() => this.showSuccess()}
Here is a link to the facebook documentation on this subject, which lists this method among others as a solution. Interestingly, they also list using .bind in the prop as one of the solutions, even though it produces a warning when actually used.
From that documentation, you'll note that this is a potential performance issue, since the function will be recreated on every render:
Note:
Using an arrow function in render creates a new function each time the
component renders, which may have performance implications (see
below).
But also from the same link:
Is it OK to use arrow functions in render methods? Generally speaking,
yes, it is OK, and it is often the easiest way to pass parameters to
callback functions.
If you do have performance issues, by all means, optimize!
So I would say if your component will be re-rendering very frequently, you should use one of the other solutions: bind in the constructor, or define the method with an arrow function in the first place. But if not, use whatever method seems cleanest to you.
You're not supposed to use anonymous functions in react attributes, e.g.
<a onClick=()=>doIt('myId')>Aaron</a>
I understand why this creates a performance problem for React's reconciliation because that anonymous function is recreated on every render pass and will thus always trigger a real DOM re-render of some kind. My question is, for a small component (i.e. not table where every row has a link) is this insignificant? I mean, React is smart enough just to replace the handler, not to re-render the DOM, right? so the cost is not that high?
I feel obliged to inform you that using an Anonymous function and Function.bind(this) in the render triggers a new render. This is because both
doIt.bind(this, 'myId') === doIt.bind(this, 'myId') // false
AND
() => doIt('myId') === () => doIt('myId') // false
are FALSE!
If you want to bind something to a function, use partial application with a method in the React class.
class myComponent extends Component {
doIt = (id) => () => {
// Do Something
}
render() {
<div>
<a onClick={this.doIt('myId')}>Aaron</a>
</div>
}
}
For:
small components: you are ok (almost no performance issues)
large components: the deeper you get the more try to avoid it
In React documentation about event handling, you can find:
In most cases, this is fine. However, if this callback is passed as a prop to lower components, those components might do an extra re-rendering. We generally recommend binding in the constructor or using the class fields syntax, to avoid this sort of performance problem.
Note: React is not handling callback props differently than other props. It always compares the old and new prop. Thus it re-renders when anonymous function is present because the anonymous function is always newly created.
Your JSX code sample should actually look like this:
<a onClick={ ()=>doIt('myId') }>Aaron</a>
Using an anonymous fat arrow function like this is perfectly valid. You are supposed to use anonymous functions in react attributes. That's okay.
Yes, it's not a best practice. If you want to solve the this context issue when using the ES6 class extends React.Component syntax I would advise you to bind the function in the class constructor.
No, for a 'small' component (i.e. not table where every row has a link) this is not a significant performance issue. You are safe.
I am working with React Native 0.29 with Android. For a particular view/activity/screen of my app, I want to add an event listener for BackAndroid button, which is available with react native. I already have a global BackAndroid event listener added to my app (in my index.android.js file) which pop out any view from the stack if it's not the main screen.
The event listener is activated with componentDidMount() lifecycle method and it works. It override the global one and works as expected. Now the problem is, it doesn't get removed when componentWillUnmount() lifecycle method get fired. So when back from that particular screen, the event listener still remains and cause trouble. Here is what I did:
componentDidMount() {
BackAndroid.addEventListener('backBtnPressed', this._handleBackBtnPress.bind(this))
}
componentWillUnmount() {
BackAndroid.removeEventListener('backBtnPressed', this._handleBackBtnPress.bind(this))
}
I don't understand why it's not working. Please help me to understand why it's not working and what should I do to solve this issue.
I spend hours to solve this problem. I think it would help other developers if I share this.
The main problem here is with the .bind(this) statement, bind always returns a new function. So in this code, this._handleBackBtnPress.bind(this) are not same functions in addEventListener and removeEventListener. They are different functions referring different first-class objects. That's why removeEventListener is not removing the listener.
To solve this issue, we can add the following statement to our constructor method - this._handleBackBtnPress = this._handleBackBtnPress.bind(this) and remove .bind(this) from both addEventListener and removeEventListener. So our code will look something like this:
constructor(props) {
super(props)
this._handleBackBtnPress = this._handleBackBtnPress.bind(this)
}
componentDidMount() {
BackAndroid.addEventListener('backBtnPressed', this._handleBackBtnPress)
}
componentWillUnmount() {
BackAndroid.removeEventListener('backBtnPressed', this._handleBackBtnPress)
}
Now both of them will refer same function and will work as expected.