I want to change the value for the hasSubmit
key, like in the First Code section. I know this is not recommended. But the second code is asynchronous and I don't want to use the callback function of setState
.
this.state
and setState
?hasSubmit
immediately?First Code:
this.state.hasSubmit = false this.setState({}) //Code that will use `hasSubmit`.
Second code:
this.setState({ hasSubmit: false, }); //Code that will use `hasSubmit`.
ADD:
The scenario is that:
hasSubmit
setfalse
ingetInitialState()
.hasSubmit
will change tofalse
when I clicksubmit
button.hasSubmit
will change totrue
when submitted.
First click submit
has no problem and hasSubmit
will be set to true
.
But second click submit
will be wrong using the Second asynchronous code
, because the hasSubmit
is still true
, while the First Code
can resolve the problem.
Here's what the React docs say:
NEVER mutate
this.state
directly, as calling setState() afterwards may replace the mutation you made. Treat this.state as if it were immutable.
setState()
does not immediately mutate this.state but creates a pending state transition. Accessingthis.state
after calling this method can potentially return the existing value.There is no guarantee of synchronous operation of calls to setState and calls may be batched for performance gains.
setState()
will always trigger a re-render unless conditional rendering logic is implemented inshouldComponentUpdate()
.If mutable objects are being used and the logic cannot be implemented in
shouldComponentUpdate()
, callingsetState()
only when the new state differs from the previous state will avoid unnecessary re-renders.
It's always sensible to use APIs in the way they were designed. If the docs say don't mutate your state, then you'd better not mutate your state.
Whilst setState()
might be technically asynchronous, it's certainly not slow in any noticeable way. The component's render()
function will be called in pretty short order.
One drawback of setting state directly is that React's lifecycle methods - shouldComponentUpdate()
, componentWillUpdate()
, componentDidUpdate()
- depend on state transitions being called with setState()
. If you change the state directly and call setState()
with an empty object, you can no longer implement those methods.
Another is that it's just bad programming style. You're doing in two statements what you could be doing in one.
Moreover, there's no actual benefit here. In both cases, render()
is not going to be triggered until after setState()
(or forceUpdate()
) is called.
You claim a need to do this without actually explaining what that need is. Perhaps you'd like to detail your problem a little more. There's probably a better solution.
It's best to work with the framework rather than against it.
From the comments below:
The need is that I want use the changed hasSubmit in below.
OK, I understand now. If you need to immediately use the future state property, your best bet is just to store it in a local variable.
const hasSubmit = false; this.setState({ hasSubmit: hasSubmit }); if (hasSubmit) { // Code that will use `hasSubmit` ...
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With