If props are not editable how does one go about adding data relevant to the user interface in a local component?
Say you receive an Array of blog posts, each post can be iterated in the interface with v-for - but each elements also needs a few extra properties only relevant to the interface like "is_active" or "is_expanded".
How does one go about adding these extra properties to each element in the array received from the prop if props should not be modified?
In particular case i am using inertia.js
So the data can not be modified outside of the component that receives the prop - in a Vuex setup one might mutate the data from the backend and prepare it for the interface before going to the component, but this isn't available here.
create a computed property which maps the prop array and adds the extra properties
computed:{
_array(){
return this.propArray.map((item) => {
return {
...item,is_active:false,is_expanded:false
})
}
}
Related
I'm trying to create a simple component whose focus is to display an element in an array, but I'm having issues with Vue's philosophy.
As you may know, if a mutation on a prop is triggered, Vue goes crazy because it doesn't want you to update the value of a prop. You should probably use a store, or emit an event.
The issue is: that since I'm adding functionalities to my codebase (for instance the possibility to start again when I reach the last element of the array), it would be wrong to have an upper component be responsible for this management, as it would be wrong to ask an upper component to change their variable, given that my component is supposed to manage the array, so an emit would be a bad solution.
In the same way, given that I'm making a generic component that can be used multiple times on a page, it would be incorrect to bind it to a store.
EDIT: the reason why the prop needs to be updated is that the component is basically acting as a <select>
Am I missing an obvious way to set this up?
To give an example of my end goal, I'm aiming for a component looking like the one in the picture below, and I think a 2 way bind like in v-model would be more appropriate than having to set an #change just to say to update the value of the passed prop.
If you have a prop the correct way to update the value is with a sync, as in the following example
Parent:
<my-component :title.sync="myTitle"></my-component>
Child:
this.$emit("update:title", this.newValue)
Here is a very good article talking about the sync method.
By the other hand you can alter a Vuex state variable by calling a Vuex mutation when you change the value:
computed: {
title: {
// getter
get() {
return this.$store.state.title
},
// setter
set(newValue) {
this.setTitle(newValue) // Requires mutation import, see the methods section.
// Or without import:
this.$store.commit('setTitle', newValue);
}
}
},
methods: {
...mapMutations("global", ["setTitle"]) // It is important to import the mutation called in the computed section
}
In this StackOverflow question they talk about changing state from computed hook in Vue. I hope it works for you.
I'm struggling with this concept in vue.js..
I'm assuming that a component in Vue is an entity with some (html) representation and internal data or state. The component can then change it's internal data based on user's interaction with the template and inform the 'outer world' about its internal changes via events.
But then to put the component in context of the application as a whole most components need to receive data from the 'outer world' which would be done via props. So for a component to be useful it most often needs to change not only it's internal state but also some data it was given from the outer context - but props cannot be mutated directly. The internal data is for the internal working of the component but the real purpose of a component is to transform the data in props.
Lets say we have a component which is, via props, given an object representing a user profile for instance. The role of the component is to let the user edit their profile.
- to avoid mutating the prop (or a subproperties of the prop), i'd add a local copy of the prop which the component could work with freely - but i'd also have to add a watch to update the local copy every time the prop gets updated by the parent via v-bind.
</template>
<input v-model="localUserProfile.name"/>
</template>
<script>
export default {
props: {
userProfile: {
type: Object,
required: true
}
},
data: function () {
return {
localUserProfile: this.userProfile
}
},
watch: {
userProfile (newVal) { this.localUserProfile = newVal }
}
}
</script>
I could replace the watch with a computed property based on the given prop and let the component work over the computed property but then where to assign the edited values? Use the computed property's setter and 'emit' on changes?
Both these cases seem like a lot of extra code for a very common and repetitive task. What are some other common approaches to this? Are any of my assumptions wrong?
You should not update the prop from the children component :
All props form a one-way-down binding between the child property and the parent one: when the parent property updates, it will flow down to the child, but not the other way around. This prevents child components from accidentally mutating the parent’s state, which can make your app’s data flow harder to understand.
In addition, every time the parent component is updated, all props in the child component will be refreshed with the latest value. This means you should not attempt to mutate a prop inside a child component. If you do, Vue will warn you in the console.
You can read more about it here
If you have no other solution than updating if from the children component, it might be worth thinking about a different data flow strategy or design. (Components Basics)
I have problem understanding why THE SAME mutation fails to refresh data displayed in components (although it does change underlying vuex store data!) if it is called from one of the components, but it does refresh the data if called from another component?
I am updating Filter objects stored in store this way: state.report.filters[], where filters is array of Filter objects.
const state = {
report: {
filters: [], // array of Filter objects
...
}
}
My mutation looks for a filter in the array and substitutes the whole Filter object.
const mutations = {
setFilter: (state, newFilterValue) => {
let changedFilter = state.report.filters.find(filter => {
return filter.fieldName === newFilterValue.fieldName;
});
changedFilter = newFilterValue;
}
}
The mutation is called from a method of Filter class defined like this (separate module):
import { store } from './store';
export class Filter {
constructor ({
...
} = {}) {
this.operators = []; // Array of Operator objects
this.value = []; // Array of values - in this case Dates
};
updateOperator (operatorName) { // this mutation refreshes components when executed
this.operator[0] = new Operator(operatorName);
store.commit('setFilter', this); // whole object passed to the mutation
};
updateValue (newValue) { // this mutation changes store value, but fails to refresh components
this.value[0] = newValue; // newValue is a Date
store.commit('setFilter', this);
};
};
The app displays data in rows (each Filter has a separate row), each row contains cells, of which one contains components dedicated to Filter's value and Operator. These dedicated components receive as props callback functions which are methods of the Filter object. They execute the callback functions when a new value is entered passing the value to the Filter which then updates a relevant property and calls the mutation passing in both cases the whole Filter object as payload.
// TABLE CELL COMPONENT displaying filter value and operator
<template>
<td>
<operator-component
:iconName="proppedFilterObject.operator.iconName"
:callback="proppedFilterObject.updateOperator.bind(proppedFilterObject)"
></operator-component>
<value-component
:date="proppedFilterObject.value[0]"
:callback="proppedFilterObject.updateValue.bind(proppedFilterObject)"
></value-component>
</td>
</template>
<script>
export default {
props: ['proppedFilterObject'] // whole filter object
};
</script>
// OPERATOR COMPONENT
<template>
<div #click.stop="chooseOperator">
{{ iconName }} // some operator value display
</div>
</template>
<script>
export default {
methods: {
chooseOperator () {
const modal = new ChooseOperatorModal({
callback: this.callback // this displays another modal for receiving data. The modal calls the callback.
});
},
},
props: ['callback', 'iconName']
};
</script>
// VALUE COMPONENT
<template>
<date-picker v-model="computedDate"> // THIRD PARTY COMPONENT
</date-picker>
{{ date }} // additional display to verify if there's a problem within 'date-picker'
</template>
<script>
import DatePicker from 'vue2-datepicker'; // THIRD PARTY COMPONENT
export default {
components: { DatePicker },
computed: {
computedDate: {
get: function () {
return this.date;
},
set: function (newValue) {
this.callback(newValue);
}
}
},
props: ['callback', 'date']
};
</script>
So, if eg. I enter new operator value from Operator component, everything refreshes. When I enter a new value in the value component, the mutation is executed and store value changed, but displayed data are not refreshed. However, if afterwards I change an operator all the components will refresh and value will get displayed. Even if I change operator in a different Filter object(!). Ie:
a) Change in report.filters[0].value - display not refreshed, but...
b) then change report.filters[1].operator - both report.filters[1].operator AND PREVIOUSLY CHANGED report.filters[0].value get refreshed(?!).
What can be a reason of such behaviour? Where to look for the problem?
Some additional remarks:
1) I am using a third party component "vue2-date-picker" for date choice and display. However it does not seem to be responsible for the problem, as if I try to display the new value just in {{ }} notation it behaves the same way. I have used the date picker in other components and there it functions correctly as well.
2) In the code samples I left out most imports/exports and other seemingly irrelevant elements to keep the question reasonably short.
There are a lot of problems with the code and several of them are contributing to the problems you're seeing. A full, thorough answer that addresses all of these problems would be ridiculously long so instead I will skim through them without going into huge amounts of detail. You will need to do some further reading and experimentation to understand each of these topics properly.
Let's start with this line in the mutation:
changedFilter = newFilterValue;
This line assigns a new value to the local variable changedFilter. That's all. As it's the last line of the mutation the net result is that it doesn't really do anything.
Presumably your intent was to update the array state.report.filters, replacing the old entry with a new entry. However, just updating a local variable isn't going to do that.
At this point you may be wondering 'If that doesn't do anything, then why is the state in my store changing?'. I'll come to that in a moment but first let me prove to you that your existing code does nothing.
Try removing the code inside setFilter completely. Just leave an empty function. Then try clicking around in the UI just like you did before. You'll find that the store state updates just the same as it did before, even though you've removed the code to update the array.
The correct way to implement that mutation would be to use findIndex to find the relevant index and then use either Vue.set or the array's splice method to update the array accordingly. That will change the item in the array. However...
This brings us back to the earlier question. Why is the state updating if the mutation does nothing?
This is because you're using the same object in multiple places. The Filter object held in the array is the same object that your UI is editing. There are no copies being taken, there is just a single object. So when you change the properties of that object inside updateOperator or updateValue this will immediately be reflected inside the store. Calling the setFilter mutation is just asking the store to replace an object with itself.
There's nothing specific to Vue about this. This is just the standard behaviour of reference types in JavaScript. It is also common with many other programming languages that don't directly expose pointers. It can be useful to learn a little about how pointers work in other languages as it will give you a better initial mental model before attempting to understand how reference types behave in JavaScript. Understanding the difference between 'by value' and 'by reference' may also be a useful starting point.
The next topic to cover is reactivity, which very much is a Vue topic.
Specifically, there are certain changes that Vue can't detect. These are usually referred to as the reactivity caveats. You can find more about them in the official documentation:
https://v2.vuejs.org/v2/guide/reactivity.html#Change-Detection-Caveats
https://v2.vuejs.org/v2/guide/list.html#Caveats
There are at least two lines in your code that violate these rules:
this.operator[0] = new Operator(operatorName);
and
this.value[0] = newValue;
You can't set array entries directly by index. The array will update but it won't trigger any reactive dependencies within Vue. Instead you need to use either Vue.set or one of the array methods, e.g. push, pop, splice, etc.. In this example you could use splice.
e.g. Using Vue.set:
Vue.set(this.value, 0, newValue);
e.g. Using splice:
this.value.splice(0, 0, newValue);
Why does all of this matters?
Well Vue will only re-render a component if its reactive dependencies have changed. They are very similar to computed properties in that regard. Here's how it works...
Vue compiles the template down to a function. That function is referred to as the render function. When rendering a component Vue calls the render function and that function returns a description of how to render the component. Any reactive properties that are touched while that function is running will be recorded as dependencies. If, at some point in the future, the value of one of those reactive properties changes then Vue will rerun the render function to generate a new rendering of that component.
There are two key points to take out of this description:
If you fall foul of one of the reactivity caveats then Vue won't know the dependency has changed, so it won't re-render the component.
The render function runs as a whole. It doesn't just target a small chunk of the template, it always runs the whole thing.
So if you change a dependency in a non-reactive way (i.e. one of the caveats) it won't trigger a rendering update. But if you subsequently update a dependency properly, Vue will detect that and will rerun the render function. When it runs it will run the whole thing, so any new values will be picked up, even if they weren't detected when they changed.
It isn't immediately clear to me which rendering dependency is causing your component to re-render. However, it only needs one of them to change in a detectable manner. Any other changes will then get pulled in incidentally when the render function runs and reads their current values.
That covers why your code isn't working. However, I would also worry about your decision to introduce a Filter class. I understand how that may be appealing if you've come from some other OO environment but it isn't typically how Vue is used. It is possible to make it work but you will need a good understanding of both JavaScript reference types and the Vue reactivity system to avoid falling through the cracks. There is no reason why using a specific class to hold your data can't be made to work but in practice it usually ends up being less maintainable than not using such a class. A more typical Vue approach would be to use simple, anonymous objects/arrays to hold the data and then for the data owner (either a component or store module) to be responsible for making any mutations to that data. Events are used to pass changes up the component hierarchy rather than callback props.
Ultimately you will need to judge whether the Filter class is justified but it is probably not what future maintainers of your code will be expecting.
I have a Parent component that is passing an array, let's call it 'bucket' that contains a bunch of stuff, to a Child component.
In my parent component, I have the following:
<child-component
:bucket=bucket
></childcomponent>
In my child component, I have a props section, that accepts a prop called bucket, and has it defined as an array, like so:
props: {
bucket: Array
}
Now in the mounted section of my child component, I want to take this bucket of stuff, and do something with it. However, for some reason, it shows up as empty. So when I do this in my child component...
mounted() {
console.log(this.bucket.length)
}
... I get a 0. When I check Vue dev tools, I can see that there are items in the bucket array in the Child component's props section. Furthermore, if in the console, with the child component set as $vm0, when I type $vm0.bucket.length, I get the correct size.
What on Earth!? Is the prop not injected yet when mounted is called in the Child component? If so, when does this actually happen? How do I get around this? Super confused.
Thanks!
try to add directive v-if
<child-component :bucket="bucket" v-if="bucket.length"></childcomponent>
if you can get this.bucket.length on component mounted this time, maybe #Stephen Thomas is right.
As you said in the comments, you are pushing new items to the bucket array.
Instead pushing items into the array, you should create a new array with the new items, example:
this.bucket = [...this.bucket, newItem];
Vue reactivity works when the value is changed, pushing a new item into an array is doesn't change the variable's value.
When you attribute an Object or Array to a variable, it's memory address that is given to the variable, so changing it's internal attributes or pushing new items won't change it's memory address.
In vue.js what is the right way to edit prop without changing parent data?
What I mean by that is whenever we pass any property from parent to child in vue.js then if we make any change to that property in child component then the change is also reflected in parent's component.
Is there any way in vue.js to make a local copy of passed property in a child?
I googled this but everywhere it is written that we can achieve this by doing this.
props:["user"],
data(){
return {
localUser: Object.assign({}, this.user)
}
}
here the user is passed an object and I am creating a copy of it in local user but it doesn't work at all, the local user is undefined.
Have you encountered a scenario like this where you have to make changes to a parent property in child component without affecting the state of parent component i.e- making your own copy in child and then edit it?
Any insights on this will be helpful.
I have also read somewhere that in In vue#2.3.3，when we want to pass a prop from Father to Child component, we need to manually create a local data to save the prop, that makes lots of useless works.
we can maually create the local data like this :
props: ['initialCounter'],
data: function () {
return { counter: this.initialCounter }
}
but this is not working in my case as well.
I am using vue cli 3.0.1 for the developemnt purpose.
Here is my code for the same.
In my application I have a list view.
When user clicks on the See Focused View button user is redirected to below mentioned view i.e is actaully a bootstrap - modal view.
Here user can edit the value of Name, but as I am passing name here as a property from aprent component so editing it here causes it to update on parent component as well i.e in the list view as well.
In your fiddle, the child component is using Object.assign() to create a copy of data, which is an array of objects. However, this only creates a shallow copy, so the array elements would still refer to the original instances, leading to the behavior you're seeing.
A few solutions to deep copy the array:
Use JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(this.data)), which works reasonably well for primitive object properties (String, Number, BigInt, Boolean, undefined, and null):
data() {
return {
local_data: JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(this.data))
}
}
(demo 1)
Map the objects into new ones, which works well if the depth is only 1 (nested arrays/objects will still be shallow copied):
data() {
return {
local_data: this.data.map(x => ({...x}))
}
}
(demo 2)
Use a utility library, such as lodash's cloneDeep:
data() {
return {
local_data: _.cloneDeep(this.data)
}
}
(demo 3)