is it possible to dispatch an action in a reducer itself? I have a progressbar and an audio element. The goal is to update the progressbar when the time gets updated in the audio element. But I don't know where to place the ontimeupdate eventhandler, or how to dispatch an action in the callback of ontimeupdate, to update the progressbar. Here is my code:
//reducer
const initialState = {
audioElement: new AudioElement('test.mp3'),
progress: 0.0
}
initialState.audioElement.audio.ontimeupdate = () => {
console.log('progress', initialState.audioElement.currentTime/initialState.audioElement.duration);
//how to dispatch 'SET_PROGRESS_VALUE' now?
};
const audio = (state=initialState, action) => {
switch(action.type){
case 'SET_PROGRESS_VALUE':
return Object.assign({}, state, {progress: action.progress});
default: return state;
}
}
export default audio;
You might try using a library like redux-saga. It allows for a very clean way to sequence async functions, fire off actions, use delays and more. It is very powerful!
Dispatching and action inside of reducer seems occurs bug.
I made a simple counter example using useReducer
which "INCREASE" is dispatched then "SUB" also does.
In the example I expected "INCREASE" is dispatched then also "SUB" does and, set cnt
to -1 and then
continue "INCREASE" action to set cnt
to 0, but it was -1 ("INCREASE" was ignored)
See this: https://codesandbox.io/s/simple-react-context-example-forked-p7po7?file=/src/index.js:144-154
let listener = () => {
console.log("test");
};
const middleware = (action) => {
console.log(action);
if (action.type === "INCREASE") {
listener();
}
};
const counterReducer = (state, action) => {
middleware(action);
switch (action.type) {
case "INCREASE":
return {
...state,
cnt: state.cnt + action.payload
};
case "SUB":
return {
...state,
cnt: state.cnt - action.payload
};
default:
return state;
}
};
const Test = () => {
const { cnt, increase, substract } = useContext(CounterContext);
useEffect(() => {
listener = substract;
});
return (
<button
onClick={() => {
increase();
}}
>
{cnt}
</button>
);
};
{type: "INCREASE", payload: 1}
{type: "SUB", payload: 1}
// expected: cnt: 0
// cnt = -1
redux-loop takes a cue from Elm and provides this pattern.
Starting another dispatch before your reducer is finished is an anti-pattern, because the state you received at the beginning of your reducer will not be the current application state anymore when your reducer finishes. But scheduling another dispatch from within a reducer is NOT an anti-pattern. In fact, that is what the Elm language does, and as you know Redux is an attempt to bring the Elm architecture to JavaScript.
Here is a middleware that will add the property asyncDispatch
to all of your actions. When your reducer has finished and returned the new application state, asyncDispatch
will trigger store.dispatch
with whatever action you give to it.
// This middleware will just add the property "async dispatch" to all actions
const asyncDispatchMiddleware = store => next => action => {
let syncActivityFinished = false;
let actionQueue = [];
function flushQueue() {
actionQueue.forEach(a => store.dispatch(a)); // flush queue
actionQueue = [];
}
function asyncDispatch(asyncAction) {
actionQueue = actionQueue.concat([asyncAction]);
if (syncActivityFinished) {
flushQueue();
}
}
const actionWithAsyncDispatch =
Object.assign({}, action, { asyncDispatch });
const res = next(actionWithAsyncDispatch);
syncActivityFinished = true;
flushQueue();
return res;
};
Now your reducer can do this:
function reducer(state, action) {
switch (action.type) {
case "fetch-start":
fetch('wwww.example.com')
.then(r => r.json())
.then(r => action.asyncDispatch({ type: "fetch-response", value: r }))
return state;
case "fetch-response":
return Object.assign({}, state, { whatever: action.value });;
}
}
Source: Stackoverflow.com