ChatGPT解决这个技术问题 Extra ChatGPT

How to update nested state properties in React

I'm trying to organize my state by using nested property like this:

this.state = {
   someProperty: {
      flag:true
   }
}

But updating state like this,

this.setState({ someProperty.flag: false });

doesn't work. How can this be done correctly?

What do you mean doesn't work? This is not a very good question - what happened? Any errors? What errors?
nested state is bad programming style in React JS
What should be used instead?
Simply not using nested state is an unacceptable answer for how widely used React is today. This situation is going to come up and developers need an answer to this.

T
Théophile

In order to setState for a nested object you can follow the below approach as I think setState doesn't handle nested updates.

var someProperty = {...this.state.someProperty}
someProperty.flag = true;
this.setState({someProperty})

The idea is to create a dummy object perform operations on it and then replace the component's state with the updated object

Now, the spread operator creates only one level nested copy of the object. If your state is highly nested like:

this.state = {
   someProperty: {
      someOtherProperty: {
          anotherProperty: {
             flag: true
          }
          ..
      }
      ...
   }
   ...
}

You could setState using spread operator at each level like

this.setState(prevState => ({
    ...prevState,
    someProperty: {
        ...prevState.someProperty,
        someOtherProperty: {
            ...prevState.someProperty.someOtherProperty, 
            anotherProperty: {
               ...prevState.someProperty.someOtherProperty.anotherProperty,
               flag: false
            }
        }
    }
}))

However the above syntax get every ugly as the state becomes more and more nested and hence I recommend you to use immutability-helper package to update the state.

See this answer on how to update state with immutability-helper.


@Ohgodwhy , no this is not accessing the state directly since {...this.state.someProperty} retuns a new obejct to someProperty and we are modifying that
this didn't work for me.. i'm using react version @15.6.1
@Stophface We can use Lodash to deep clone sure, but not everyone would include this library just to setState
Doesn't this violate reactjs.org/docs/… ? If two changes to the nested object got batched the last change would overwrite the first. So the most correct way would be: this.setState((prevState) => ({nested: {...prevState.nested, propertyToSet: newValue}}) A bit tedious though...
I don't think you need the ...prevState, in the last example, you only someProperty and its children
Y
Yoseph

To write it in one line

this.setState({ someProperty: { ...this.state.someProperty, flag: false} });

It is recommended to use the updater for setState instead of directly accessing this.state within setState. reactjs.org/docs/react-component.html#setstate
I believe that's saying, don't read this.state immediately after setState and expect it to have the new value. Versus calling this.state within setState. Or is there also an issue with the latter that isn't clear to me?
As trpt4him said, the link you gave talks about the problem of accessing this.state after setState. Besides, we are not passing this.state to setState. The operator spread properties. It is the same as Object.assign(). github.com/tc39/proposal-object-rest-spread
@RaghuTeja maybe just making this.setState(currentState => { someProperty: { ...currentState.someProperty, flag: false} }); could allow to avoid this issue?
I have added the answer how to achieve the same with useState hook for completeness.
K
Konstantin Smolyanin

Sometimes direct answers are not the best ones :)

Short version:

this code

this.state = {
    someProperty: {
        flag: true
    }
}

should be simplified as something like

this.state = {
    somePropertyFlag: true
}

Long version:

Currently you shouldn't want to work with nested state in React. Because React is not oriented to work with nested states and all solutions proposed here look as hacks. They don't use the framework but fight with it. They suggest to write not so clear code for doubtful purpose of grouping some properties. So they are very interesting as an answer to the challenge but practically useless.

Lets imagine the following state:

{
    parent: {
        child1: 'value 1',
        child2: 'value 2',
        ...
        child100: 'value 100'
    }
}

What will happen if you change just a value of child1? React will not re-render the view because it uses shallow comparison and it will find that parent property didn't change. BTW mutating the state object directly is considered to be a bad practice in general.

So you need to re-create the whole parent object. But in this case we will meet another problem. React will think that all children have changed their values and will re-render all of them. Of course it is not good for performance.

It is still possible to solve that problem by writing some complicated logic in shouldComponentUpdate() but I would prefer to stop here and use simple solution from the short version.


I think there are use cases where a nested state is perfectly fine. E.g. a state dynamically keeping track of key-value pairs. See here how you can update the state for just a single entry in the state: reactjs.org/docs/…
I want to create an altar in your honor and pray to it every morning. It took me three days to reach this answer that perfectly explains the OBVIOUS design decision. Everyone just tries to use the spread operator or do other hacks just because nested state looks more human-readable.
How do you suggest then, to use React to do things like rendering an interactive tree (for example, my company has a bunch of sensors in different parts of the world, each of different type, with different properties, in different locations (80+), and OF COURSE they are organized in a hierarchy as each deployment costs thousands of dollars and is a complete project so it would be impossible to manage them without a hierarchy). I'm pretty curious on how you wouldn't model things like trees as... trees, in React.
seems like React was not made for representing anything that is stored as a recursive structure of non-trivial depth. It's a bit disappointing as tree-views appear in almost every complex application out there (gmail, file managers, any document management system,..). I've used React for these things, but always had a React zealot telling everyone you're doing anti-patterns and suggesting the solution is keeping deep copies of the tree in the state of every node (yes, 80 copies). I'd love to see a non-hacky tree-view component that doesn't break any React rules.
This, a million times. I have spent so much time messing with nested parameters because of unhelpful comments online showing that it is possible in some confusing manner. The react docs should really point this out at the beginning of the section on setState!
Q
Qwerty

Disclaimer

Nested State in React is wrong design Read this excellent answer.

Reasoning behind this answer: React's setState is just a built-in convenience, but you soon realise that it has its limits. Using custom properties and intelligent use of forceUpdate gives you much more. eg: class MyClass extends React.Component { myState = someObject inputValue = 42 ... MobX, for example, ditches state completely and uses custom observable properties. Use Observables instead of state in React components.

the answer to your misery - see example here

There is another shorter way to update whatever nested property.

this.setState(state => {
  state.nested.flag = false
  state.another.deep.prop = true
  return state
})

On one line

 this.setState(state => (state.nested.flag = false, state))

note: This here is Comma operator ~MDN, see it in action here (Sandbox).

It is similar to (though this doesn't change state reference)

this.state.nested.flag = false
this.forceUpdate()

For the subtle difference in this context between forceUpdate and setState see the linked example and sandbox.

Of course this is abusing some core principles, as the state should be read-only, but since you are immediately discarding the old state and replacing it with new state, it is completely ok.

Warning

Even though the component containing the state will update and rerender properly (except this gotcha), the props will fail to propagate to children (see Spymaster's comment below). Only use this technique if you know what you are doing.

For example, you may pass a changed flat prop that is updated and passed easily.

render(
  //some complex render with your nested state
  <ChildComponent complexNestedProp={this.state.nested} pleaseRerender={Math.random()}/>
)

Now even though reference for complexNestedProp did not change (shouldComponentUpdate)

this.props.complexNestedProp === nextProps.complexNestedProp

the component will rerender whenever parent component updates, which is the case after calling this.setState or this.forceUpdate in the parent.

Effects of mutating the state sandbox

Using nested state and mutating the state directly is dangerous because different objects might hold (intentionally or not) different (older) references to the state and might not necessarily know when to update (for example when using PureComponent or if shouldComponentUpdate is implemented to return false) OR are intended to display old data like in the example below.

Imagine a timeline that is supposed to render historic data, mutating the data under the hand will result in unexpected behaviour as it will also change previous items.

https://i.stack.imgur.com/Hl7fa.gif

Anyway here you can see that Nested PureChildClass is not rerendered due to props failing to propagate.


You shouldn't be mutating any react state anywhere. If there are nested components that use data from state.nested or state.another, they won't re-render nor will their children. This is because the object did not change, thus React thinks nothing has changed.
@tobiv It's better to transform the data upon a fetch into a different structure, but it depends on the usecase. It's okay to have a nested object or array of objects in a state if you think of them as compact units of some data. The problem arises when you need to store UI switches or other observable data (i.e. data that should immediately change the view) as they must be flat in order to correctly trigger internal React diffing algorithms. For changes in other nested objects, it's easy to trigger this.forceUpdate() or implement specific shouldComponentUpdate.
You should remove your statement "the best answer of all". How do you know that it's the best answer? Your statement is misleading and overopinionated.
A little bit offtop - could you provide some info why (expression1, expression2) in this.setState(state => (state.nested.flag = false, state)) works that way? (docs, mdn, search request etc)
@MegaProger This is a Comma operator ~MDN. And in fact, returning just an empty object (exp1, {}) in the setState call would also work, but I didn't want to create new objects unnecessarily. sandbox
A
Alyssa Roose

If you are using ES2015 you have access to the Object.assign. You can use it as follows to update a nested object.

this.setState({
  someProperty: Object.assign({}, this.state.someProperty, {flag: false})
});

You merge the updated properties with the existing and use the returned object to update the state.

Edit: Added an empty object as target to the assign function to make sure the state isn't mutated directly as carkod pointed out.


And I could be wrong but I don't think you're using React without ES2015.
a
alphablend.dev
const newState = Object.assign({}, this.state);
newState.property.nestedProperty = "new value";
this.setState(newState);

seems the more elegant solution here, 1) avoiding the tedious spreading inside setState and 2) put nicely the new state inside setState, avoiding to mutate the directly inside setState. Last but not least 3) avoiding the use of any library for just a simple task
The two examples are not equivalent. If the property contains several nested properties, the first will delete them, the second won't. codesandbox.io/s/nameless-pine-42thu
Qwerty, you are right, thanks for the effort. I removed the ES6 version.
Straighforward and simple!
I used your solution. My state obj is small, and it worked fine. Will React render for the changed state only or will it render everything?
J
Joakim Jäderberg

We use Immer https://github.com/mweststrate/immer to handle these kinds of issues.

Just replaced this code in one of our components

this.setState(prevState => ({
   ...prevState,
        preferences: {
            ...prevState.preferences,
            [key]: newValue
        }
}));

With this

import produce from 'immer';

this.setState(produce(draft => {
    draft.preferences[key] = newValue;
}));

With immer you handle your state as a "normal object". The magic happens behind the scene with proxy objects.


t
tokland

There are many libraries to help with this. For example, using immutability-helper:

import update from 'immutability-helper';

const newState = update(this.state, {
  someProperty: {flag: {$set: false}},
};
this.setState(newState);

Using lodash/fp set:

import {set} from 'lodash/fp';

const newState = set(["someProperty", "flag"], false, this.state);

Using lodash/fp merge:

import {merge} from 'lodash/fp';

const newState = merge(this.state, {
  someProperty: {flag: false},
});

If you use lodash, you probably want to try _.cloneDeep and set state to be the cloned copy.
@YixingLiu: I've updated the answer to use lodash/fp, so we don't have to worry about mutations.
Any advantage to choosing merge or set functions in lodash/fp besides syntax?
Good answer, maybe you wish to add that you have to call this.setState(newState) for the lodash/fp methods as well. Another gotcha is that lodash .set (non-fp) has a different order of arguments which tripped me up for a while.
Merge has some strange behavior, when calling this.setState(newState), it creates another state item called newState in this.state. Any idea why?
A
Andrew

Although you asked about a state of class-based React component, the same problem exists with useState hook. Even worse: useState hook does not accept partial updates. So this question became very relevant when useState hook was introduced.

I have decided to post the following answer to make sure the question covers more modern scenarios where the useState hook is used:

If you have got:

const [state, setState] = useState({ someProperty: { flag: true, otherNestedProp: 1 }, otherProp: 2 })

you can set the nested property by cloning the current and patching the required segments of the data, for example:

setState(current => { ...current, someProperty: { ...current.someProperty, flag: false } });

Or you can use Immer library to simplify the cloning and patching of the object.

Or you can use Hookstate library (disclaimer: I am an author) to simply the management of complex (local and global) state data entirely and improve the performance (read: not to worry about rendering optimization):

import { useStateLink } from '@hookstate/core' 
const state = useStateLink({ someProperty: { flag: true, otherNestedProp: 1 }, otherProp: 2 })

get the field to render:

state.nested.someProperty.nested.flag.get()
// or 
state.get().someProperty.flag

set the nested field:

state.nested.someProperty.nested.flag.set(false)

Here is the Hookstate example, where the state is deeply / recursively nested in tree-like data structure.


M
Matthew Berkompas

Here's a variation on the first answer given in this thread which doesn't require any extra packages, libraries or special functions.

state = {
  someProperty: {
    flag: 'string'
  }
}

handleChange = (value) => {
  const newState = {...this.state.someProperty, flag: value}
  this.setState({ someProperty: newState })
}

In order to set the state of a specific nested field, you have set the whole object. I did this by creating a variable, newState and spreading the contents of the current state into it first using the ES2015 spread operator. Then, I replaced the value of this.state.flag with the new value (since I set flag: value after I spread the current state into the object, the flag field in the current state is overridden). Then, I simply set the state of someProperty to my newState object.


A
Alberto Piras

I used this solution.

If you have a nested state like this:

   this.state = {
          formInputs:{
            friendName:{
              value:'',
              isValid:false,
              errorMsg:''
            },
            friendEmail:{
              value:'',
              isValid:false,
              errorMsg:''
            }
}

you can declare the handleChange function that copy current status and re-assigns it with changed values

handleChange(el) {
    let inputName = el.target.name;
    let inputValue = el.target.value;

    let statusCopy = Object.assign({}, this.state);
    statusCopy.formInputs[inputName].value = inputValue;

    this.setState(statusCopy);
  }

here the html with the event listener

<input type="text" onChange={this.handleChange} " name="friendName" />

Confirmed. This works great if you're already dealing with an already established project with nested properties.
Object.assign only does a shallow copy, so you're mutating a nested object. Don't mutate the previous state.
u
user2208124

Although nesting isn't really how you should treat a component state, sometimes for something easy for single tier nesting.

For a state like this

state = {
 contact: {
  phone: '888-888-8888',
  email: 'test@test.com'
 }
 address: {
  street:''
 },
 occupation: {
 }
}

A re-useable method ive used would look like this.

handleChange = (obj) => e => {
  let x = this.state[obj];
  x[e.target.name] = e.target.value;
  this.setState({ [obj]: x });
};

then just passing in the obj name for each nesting you want to address...

<TextField
 name="street"
 onChange={handleChange('address')}
 />

This mutates the current state object instead of creating a copy. Do not mutate the state!
r
ravibagul91

Create a copy of the state:

let someProperty = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(this.state.someProperty))

make changes in this object:

someProperty.flag = "false"

now update the state

this.setState({someProperty})

setState is asynchronous. So while it updates, someone else can call this function and copy an outdated version of the state.
K
Ken

Not sure if this is technically correct according to the framework's standards, but sometimes you simply need to update nested objects. Here is my solution using hooks.

setInputState({ ...inputState, [parentKey]: { ...inputState[parentKey], [childKey]: value }, });


Have you implemented it?
m
moshfiqrony

I am seeing everyone has given the class based component state update solve which is expected because he asked that for but I am trying to give the same solution for hook.

const [state, setState] = useState({
    state1: false,
    state2: 'lorem ipsum'
})

Now if you want to change the nested object key state1 only then you can do the any of the following:

Process 1

let oldState = state;
oldState.state1 = true
setState({...oldState);

Process 2

setState(prevState => ({
    ...prevState,
    state1: true
}))

I prefer the process 2 most.


"Process 1" is an anti-pattern in React since it mutates the current state object.
C
Cory House

Two other options not mentioned yet:

If you have deeply nested state, consider if you can restructure the child objects to sit at the root. This makes the data easier to update. There are many handy libraries available for handling immutable state listed in the Redux docs. I recommend Immer since it allows you to write code in a mutative manner but handles the necessary cloning behind the scenes. It also freezes the resulting object so you can't accidentally mutate it later.


V
Venugopal

To make things generic, I worked on @ShubhamKhatri's and @Qwerty's answers.

state object

this.state = {
  name: '',
  grandParent: {
    parent1: {
      child: ''
    },
    parent2: {
      child: ''
    }
  }
};

input controls

<input
  value={this.state.name}
  onChange={this.updateState}
  type="text"
  name="name"
/>
<input
  value={this.state.grandParent.parent1.child}
  onChange={this.updateState}
  type="text"
  name="grandParent.parent1.child"
/>
<input
  value={this.state.grandParent.parent2.child}
  onChange={this.updateState}
  type="text"
  name="grandParent.parent2.child"
/>

updateState method

setState as @ShubhamKhatri's answer

updateState(event) {
  const path = event.target.name.split('.');
  const depth = path.length;
  const oldstate = this.state;
  const newstate = { ...oldstate };
  let newStateLevel = newstate;
  let oldStateLevel = oldstate;

  for (let i = 0; i < depth; i += 1) {
    if (i === depth - 1) {
      newStateLevel[path[i]] = event.target.value;
    } else {
      newStateLevel[path[i]] = { ...oldStateLevel[path[i]] };
      oldStateLevel = oldStateLevel[path[i]];
      newStateLevel = newStateLevel[path[i]];
    }
  }
  this.setState(newstate);
}

setState as @Qwerty's answer

updateState(event) {
  const path = event.target.name.split('.');
  const depth = path.length;
  const state = { ...this.state };
  let ref = state;
  for (let i = 0; i < depth; i += 1) {
    if (i === depth - 1) {
      ref[path[i]] = event.target.value;
    } else {
      ref = ref[path[i]];
    }
  }
  this.setState(state);
}

Note: These above methods won't work for arrays


S
Stephen Paul

I take very seriously the concerns already voiced around creating a complete copy of your component state. With that said, I would strongly suggest Immer.

import produce from 'immer';

<Input
  value={this.state.form.username}
  onChange={e => produce(this.state, s => { s.form.username = e.target.value }) } />

This should work for React.PureComponent (i.e. shallow state comparisons by React) as Immer cleverly uses a proxy object to efficiently copy an arbitrarily deep state tree. Immer is also more typesafe compared to libraries like Immutability Helper, and is ideal for Javascript and Typescript users alike.

Typescript utility function

function setStateDeep<S>(comp: React.Component<any, S, any>, fn: (s: 
Draft<Readonly<S>>) => any) {
  comp.setState(produce(comp.state, s => { fn(s); }))
}

onChange={e => setStateDeep(this, s => s.form.username = e.target.value)}

R
R Rejneesh Pillai

If you want to set the state dynamically

following example sets the state of form dynamically where each key in state is object

 onChange(e:React.ChangeEvent<HTMLInputElement | HTMLTextAreaElement>) {
    this.setState({ [e.target.name]: { ...this.state[e.target.name], value: e.target.value } });
  }

M
Michael

I found this to work for me, having a project form in my case where for example you have an id, and a name and I'd rather maintain state for a nested project.

return (
  <div>
      <h2>Project Details</h2>
      <form>
        <Input label="ID" group type="number" value={this.state.project.id} onChange={(event) => this.setState({ project: {...this.state.project, id: event.target.value}})} />
        <Input label="Name" group type="text" value={this.state.project.name} onChange={(event) => this.setState({ project: {...this.state.project, name: event.target.value}})} />
      </form> 
  </div>
)

Let me know!


b
barbsan
stateUpdate = () => {
    let obj = this.state;
    if(this.props.v12_data.values.email) {
      obj.obj_v12.Customer.EmailAddress = this.props.v12_data.values.email
    }
    this.setState(obj)
}

I don't think this is correct, since obj is just a reference to the state, so through it you are mutating the actual this.state object
D
DragonKnight

This is clearly not the right or best way to do, however it is cleaner to my view:

this.state.hugeNestedObject = hugeNestedObject; 
this.state.anotherHugeNestedObject = anotherHugeNestedObject; 

this.setState({})

However, React itself should iterate thought nested objects and update state and DOM accordingly which is not there yet.


Do not mutate the current state, it's an anti-pattern in React.
s
shavina

Use this for multiple input control and dynamic nested name

<input type="text" name="title" placeholder="add title" onChange={this.handleInputChange} />
<input type="checkbox" name="chkusein" onChange={this.handleInputChange} />
<textarea name="body" id="" cols="30" rows="10" placeholder="add blog content" onChange={this.handleInputChange}></textarea>

the code very readable

the handler

handleInputChange = (event) => {
        const target = event.target;
        const value = target.type === 'checkbox' ? target.checked : target.value;
        const name = target.name;
        const newState = { ...this.state.someProperty, [name]: value }
        this.setState({ someProperty: newState })
    }

A
Alex Pandrea

Here's a full example using nested state (one level) with the solution in this answer, for a component implemented as a class:

class CaveEditModal extends React.Component {

  // ...

  constructor(props, context) {
    super(props);
    this.state = {

      tabValue: '1',
      isModalOpen: this.props.isModalOpen,

      // ...
      caveData: {
        latitude: 1,
        longitude: 2      
      }
    };

    // ... 

    const updateNestedFieldEvent = fullKey => ev => { 
      
      var [parentProperty, _key] = fullKey.split(".", 2);

      this.setState({[parentProperty]: { ...this.state[parentProperty], [_key]: ev.target.value} });
    };
    // ...

    this.handleLatitudeChange = updateNestedFieldEvent('caveData.latitude');
    this.handleLongitudeChange = updateNestedFieldEvent('caveData.longitude');
  }

  render () {    
    return (
      <div>
         <TextField id="latitude" label="Latitude" type="number" value={this.state.caveData.latitude} onChange={this.handleLatitudeChange} />
         <TextField id="longitude" label="Longitude" type="number" value={this.state.caveData.longitude} onChange={this.handleLongitudeChange} />
         <span>lat={this.state.caveData.latitude} long={this.state.caveData.longitude}</span>
      </div>
    );
  };

}

Note that the state updater function updateNestedFieldEvent works only for one level nested object like a.b, not like a.b.c.


E
Eladian

Something like this might suffice,

const isObject = (thing) => {
    if(thing && 
        typeof thing === 'object' &&
        typeof thing !== null
        && !(Array.isArray(thing))
    ){
        return true;
    }
    return false;
}

/*
  Call with an array containing the path to the property you want to access
  And the current component/redux state.

  For example if we want to update `hello` within the following obj
  const obj = {
     somePrimitive:false,
     someNestedObj:{
        hello:1
     }
  }

  we would do :
  //clone the object
  const cloned = clone(['someNestedObj','hello'],obj)
  //Set the new value
  cloned.someNestedObj.hello = 5;

*/
const clone = (arr, state) => {
    let clonedObj = {...state}
    const originalObj = clonedObj;
    arr.forEach(property => {
        if(!(property in clonedObj)){
            throw new Error('State missing property')
        }

        if(isObject(clonedObj[property])){
            clonedObj[property] = {...originalObj[property]};
            clonedObj = clonedObj[property];
        }
    })
    return originalObj;
}

const nestedObj = {
    someProperty:true,
    someNestedObj:{
        someOtherProperty:true
    }
}

const clonedObj = clone(['someProperty'], nestedObj);
console.log(clonedObj === nestedObj) //returns false
console.log(clonedObj.someProperty === nestedObj.someProperty) //returns true
console.log(clonedObj.someNestedObj === nestedObj.someNestedObj) //returns true

console.log()
const clonedObj2 = clone(['someProperty','someNestedObj','someOtherProperty'], nestedObj);
console.log(clonedObj2 === nestedObj) // returns false
console.log(clonedObj2.someNestedObj === nestedObj.someNestedObj) //returns false
//returns true (doesn't attempt to clone because its primitive type)
console.log(clonedObj2.someNestedObj.someOtherProperty === nestedObj.someNestedObj.someOtherProperty) 

E
Elnoor

I know it is an old question but still wanted to share how i achieved this. Assuming state in constructor looks like this:

  constructor(props) {
    super(props);

    this.state = {
      loading: false,
      user: {
        email: ""
      },
      organization: {
        name: ""
      }
    };

    this.handleChange = this.handleChange.bind(this);
  }

My handleChange function is like this:

  handleChange(e) {
    const names = e.target.name.split(".");
    const value = e.target.type === "checkbox" ? e.target.checked : e.target.value;
    this.setState((state) => {
      state[names[0]][names[1]] = value;
      return {[names[0]]: state[names[0]]};
    });
  }

And make sure you name inputs accordingly:

<input
   type="text"
   name="user.email"
   onChange={this.handleChange}
   value={this.state.user.firstName}
   placeholder="Email Address"
/>

<input
   type="text"
   name="organization.name"
   onChange={this.handleChange}
   value={this.state.organization.name}
   placeholder="Organization Name"
/>

state[names[0]][names[1]] = value this mutates the previous state object, which is an anti-pattern with React.
E
Emisael Carrera

I do nested updates with a reduce search:

Example:

The nested variables in state:

state = {
    coords: {
        x: 0,
        y: 0,
        z: 0
    }
}

The function:

handleChange = nestedAttr => event => {
  const { target: { value } } = event;
  const attrs = nestedAttr.split('.');

  let stateVar = this.state[attrs[0]];
  if(attrs.length>1)
    attrs.reduce((a,b,index,arr)=>{
      if(index==arr.length-1)
        a[b] = value;
      else if(a[b]!=null)
        return a[b]
      else
        return a;
    },stateVar);
  else
    stateVar = value;

  this.setState({[attrs[0]]: stateVar})
}

Use:

<input
value={this.state.coords.x}
onChange={this.handleTextChange('coords.x')}
/>

a[b] = value this mutates the nested state object returned by this.state[attrs[0]]. Do not mutate the current state objects.
R
Ramiro Carbonell Delgado

This is my initialState

    const initialStateInput = {
        cabeceraFamilia: {
            familia: '',
            direccion: '',
            telefonos: '',
            email: ''
        },
        motivoConsulta: '',
        fechaHora: '',
        corresponsables: [],
    }

The hook or you can replace it with the state (class component)

const [infoAgendamiento, setInfoAgendamiento] = useState(initialStateInput);

The method for handleChange

const actualizarState = e => {
    const nameObjects = e.target.name.split('.');
    const newState = setStateNested(infoAgendamiento, nameObjects, e.target.value);
    setInfoAgendamiento({...newState});
};

Method for set state with nested states

const setStateNested = (state, nameObjects, value) => {
    let i = 0;
    let operativeState = state;
    if(nameObjects.length > 1){
        for (i = 0; i < nameObjects.length - 1; i++) {
            operativeState = operativeState[nameObjects[i]];
        }
    }
    operativeState[nameObjects[i]] = value;
    return state;
}

Finally this is the input that I use

<input type="text" className="form-control" name="cabeceraFamilia.direccion" placeholder="Dirección" defaultValue={infoAgendamiento.cabeceraFamilia.direccion} onChange={actualizarState} />

S
Sharad Sharma

If you are using formik in your project it has some easy way to handle this stuff. Here is the most easiest way to do with formik.

First set your initial values inside the formik initivalues attribute or in the react. state

Here, the initial values is define in react state

   state = { 
     data: {
        fy: {
            active: "N"
        }
     }
   }

define above initialValues for formik field inside formik initiValues attribute

<Formik
 initialValues={this.state.data}
 onSubmit={(values, actions)=> {...your actions goes here}}
>
{({ isSubmitting }) => (
  <Form>
    <Field type="checkbox" name="fy.active" onChange={(e) => {
      const value = e.target.checked;
      if(value) setFieldValue('fy.active', 'Y')
      else setFieldValue('fy.active', 'N')
    }}/>
  </Form>
)}
</Formik>

Make a console to the check the state updated into string instead of booleanthe formik setFieldValue function to set the state or go with react debugger tool to see the changes iniside formik state values.


L
LoneWanderer

try this code:

this.setState({ someProperty: {flag: false} });

But this will remove any other properties present in object referenced by someProperty and after the above code is executed only flag property will remain