import { DOMAttributes } from ‘react’;
How to pre-check or pre-validate form data before submission in React Hook Form?
import { DOMAttributes } from ‘react’;
In React Hook Form, it is a little confusing how to separate multiple input areas in a page.
For example, there may be multiple forms, inputs in completely different areas of the page, modals opening from different triggers, etc.
If you check the Dev Tools, you might see warnings when a form tag is used inside another form tag. It seems using form tags is a bit risky for pages with complex input layouts.
I asked Gemini AI about these issues, and have documented the responses below:
Generally, it’s not recommended to create nested useForm
instances within a FormProvider
in React Hook Form.
Here’s why:
useForm
instance, combined with FormProvider
and useFormContext
, is usually sufficient to manage complex forms. Creating nested useForm
instances can introduce unnecessary complexity and potential issues with form state management.useForm
instances might lead to conflicts in form data and validation. It can be difficult to manage and track the state of different form sections independently.useForm
instances might impact performance, especially for larger forms with many fields.Recommended Approach:
useForm
instance at the top level of your form component.FormProvider
to provide form context to child components.useFormContext
within nested components to access form methods and data.By following this structure, you can effectively manage your form’s state and behavior while maintaining clarity and efficiency.
Example:
import React from 'react';
import { useForm, FormProvider, useFormContext } from 'react-hook-form';
function MyForm() {
const methods = useForm();
return (
<FormProvider {...methods}>
<form onSubmit={methods.handleSubmit(onSubmit)}>
{/* Main form fields */}
<NestedComponent />
{/* Other form elements */}
</form>
</FormProvider>
);
}
function NestedComponent() {
const { control } = useFormContext();
// Access form methods and data using control
return (
<div>
{/* Nested form fields */}
</div>
);
}
In this example, useForm
is used once at the top level, and useFormContext
is employed within NestedComponent
to access the shared form context.
Exceptions:
There might be specific use cases where creating nested useForm
instances could be considered, but they should be carefully evaluated and approached with caution. For example, if you have highly independent form sections that need to be managed separately, you might explore this option, but it’s generally recommended to find alternative solutions first.
By following these guidelines, you can create well-structured and maintainable forms using React Hook Form.
useForm
Instances: A Cautious ApproachYes, technically, you can use two different useForm
instances without useFormContext
for nested forms. This approach can work under certain conditions, but it’s generally not recommended due to potential complexities and limitations.
useForm
instance manages its own form data and validation independently. This can make it difficult to synchronize or interact between the two forms, especially if there’s a dependency between them.useFormContext
, such as easily accessing form methods and data in nested components.useForm
instances might be reasonable.In most cases, using a single useForm
instance with FormProvider
and useFormContext
is the preferred method for managing nested forms. It offers better control, flexibility, and maintainability.
I understand the challenge. Having related data in a modal context often presents complexities in form management.
Single useForm
Instance with Shared State:
Separate useForm
Instances with Data Transfer:
useForm
instances for the main form and the modal.Custom Form Context:
useFormContext
, allowing for custom logic.React Hook Form generally recommends a single useForm
instance for managing form data and validation within a component hierarchy. This approach provides better control, efficiency, and avoids potential issues with state management.
Here are some key recommendations from the React Hook Form documentation:
useForm
: Create a single instance at the top level of your form component.FormProvider
: Provide form context to child components using FormProvider
.useFormContext
: Access form methods and data in nested components using useFormContext
.defaultValues
prop in useForm
to initialize form fields.watch
, unregister
, and formState
to manage form state effectively.useForm
Instance is PreferredYes, even when using modals, React Hook Form generally recommends a single useForm
instance. This approach provides several benefits:
useForm
Instance:useForm
instance at the top level of your component hierarchy.FormProvider
to provide form context to both your main form and the modal component.useFormContext
within the modal to access form methods and data.Example:
import React, { useState } from 'react';
import { useForm, FormProvider, useFormContext } from 'react-hook-form';
function MyForm() {
const methods = useForm();
const [isModalOpen, setIsModalOpen] = useState(false);
const openModal = () => setIsModalOpen(true);
const closeModal = () => setIsModalOpen(false);
return
(
<FormProvider {...methods}>
{/* Main form */}
<button onClick={openModal}>Open Modal</button>
{isModalOpen && <Modal onClose={closeModal}>
<ModalForm />
</Modal>}
</FormProvider>
);
}
function ModalForm() {
const { register, handleSubmit } = useFormContext();
// ... modal form content
}
While using a single useForm
instance is generally recommended, there might be specific use cases where creating a separate useForm
instance for the modal could be considered. However, carefully evaluate the trade-offs and potential complexities before choosing this approach.
The placement of a modal within the DOM hierarchy relative to the FormProvider
is generally not a critical factor for using React Hook Form effectively.
FormProvider
creates a context that is accessible to its descendants. Whether the modal is a direct child or positioned elsewhere in the DOM tree doesn’t affect this context’s availability.body
for styling or accessibility purposes. This is an implementation detail of the library and doesn’t inherently conflict with React Hook Form.useForm
instance at the top level of your component hierarchy.FormProvider
to wrap the main form and any components that need access to form context.FormProvider
or a different part of the component tree.useFormContext
within the modal to access form methods and data.Example:
import React, { useState } from 'react';
import { useForm, FormProvider, useFormContext } from 'react-hook-form';
import Modal from 'react-modal'; // Or your preferred modal library
function MyForm() {
const methods = useForm();
const [isModalOpen, setIsModalOpen] = useState(false);
// ...
return (
<FormProvider {...methods}>
{/* Main form */}
<button onClick={() => setIsModalOpen(true)}>Open Modal</button>
<Modal isOpen={isModalOpen} onRequestClose={() => setIsModalOpen(false)}>
<ModalForm />
</Modal>
</FormProvider>
);
}
function ModalForm() {
const { register, handleSubmit } = useFormContext();
// ... modal form content
}
By following these guidelines, you can effectively use React Hook Form with modals, regardless of their placement in the DOM.
React Portals offer a solution to append a child component to a different part of the DOM while maintaining its relationship with the parent component. This is ideal for modals that often need to be rendered outside the main content area.
Import createPortal
from React:
import { createPortal } from 'react-dom';
Create a reference to the body element:
const body = document.getElementById('root'); // Or your root element
Wrap the modal component in createPortal
:
<FormProvider {...methods}>
{/* Main form */}
{isModalOpen && createPortal(
<Modal onClose={() => setIsModalOpen(false)}>
<ModalForm />
</Modal>,
body
)}
</FormProvider>
import React, { useState } from 'react';
import { useForm, FormProvider, useFormContext } from 'react-hook-form';
import { createPortal } from 'react-dom';
function MyForm() {
const methods = useForm();
const [isModalOpen, setIsModalOpen] = useState(false);
const body = document.getElementById('root'); // Or your root element
return (
<FormProvider {...methods}>
{/* Main form */}
<button onClick={() => setIsModalOpen(true)}>Open Modal</button>
{isModalOpen && createPortal(
<div className="modal">
<div className="modal-content">
<ModalForm />
</div>
</div>,
body
)}
</FormProvider>
);
}
function ModalForm() {
const { register, handleSubmit } = useFormContext();
// ... modal form content
}
ModalForm
component still has access to the form context provided by FormProvider
because it’s a descendant.body
.By using React Portals, you can effectively combine the benefits of React Hook Form’s context-based approach with the desired placement of your modal.
This article provides information from Gemini AI regarding how to type React Hook Form form data.
The reasoning for this dialogue is due to there not being clear information about this, and the general loose typing that React Hook Form enforces.
The loose typing I talk about here is how using React Hook Form methods, types are made undefined or null even if the original type did not allow for this.
It seems that it is expected that fields may not be set, so handling of form data should take this into consideration, especially when submitting data.
Please see below for the AI dialogue with more details:
Yes, it’s highly recommended to format your form data before sending it to the API.
React Hook Form provides a convenient way to manage form state, but it doesn’t inherently guarantee the data structure aligns perfectly with your API’s expectations. Common reasons for formatting include:
By formatting the data, you ensure data integrity and prevent potential API errors.
useForm
To maintain flexibility and accommodate potential data variations, consider using a generic type like any
for the useForm
parameter:
import { useForm } from 'react-hook-form';
const MyForm = () => {
const { handleSubmit } = useForm<any>();
const onSubmit = (data) => {
// Format data here
const formattedData = formatData(data);
// Send formatted data to API
api.post('/endpoint', formattedData);
};
return (
<form onSubmit={handleSubmit(onSubmit)}>
{/* Your form elements */}
</form>
);
};
While any
might seem less type-safe, it allows you to handle various data structures without strict type constraints. You can implement custom validation and formatting logic to ensure data correctness.
Use handleSubmit
for form submission.
This is the recommended approach as it provides several benefits:
onSubmit
handler.isSubmitting
, isValid
) for better user experience.const { handleSubmit } = useForm();
const onSubmit = (data) => {
// ...
};
return (
<form onSubmit={handleSubmit(onSubmit)}>
{/* Your form elements */}
</form>
);
Avoid using trigger
for form submission.
While trigger
can be used to manually trigger validation, it’s not intended for submitting the form. Using handleSubmit
is the standard and recommended way to handle form submissions.
formik
or yup
for additional features and simplified data management.By following these guidelines and carefully considering your specific requirements, you can effectively handle form data formatting and submission in React Hook Form.
Would you like to see a code example with data formatting and API submission?
You’re absolutely right. Using any
as a generic type for useForm
can be too permissive. Let’s explore more suitable options.
The ideal type for useForm
balances flexibility with type safety. We want to capture the general shape of the form data without being overly restrictive.
Interface or Type Alias:
interface FormData {
name: string;
email: string;
age: number;
// ... other properties
}
const { handleSubmit } = useForm<FormData>();
Partial Type:
Partial<T>
to make all properties of an interface optional.interface FormData {
name: string;
email: string;
age?: number; // Optional property
// ... other properties
}
const { handleSubmit } = useForm<Partial<FormData>>();
Generic Interface:
interface FormData<T extends Record<string, any>> {
name: string;
email: string;
// ... other common properties
additionalData?: T;
}
const { handleSubmit } = useForm<FormData<any>>();
The best option depends on your specific use case:
Record
, Partial
, and Omit
to create tailored types.By carefully considering these factors, you can select the appropriate generic type for your React Hook Form and enhance your application’s type safety.
Would you like to provide more details about your form structure so I can suggest a more specific type?
Unfortunately, React Hook Form doesn’t provide a direct way to specify the entire form data structure as a generic type. The primary focus of its type definitions is on individual field-level interactions and validation.
To achieve the desired level of type safety and structure for your form data, creating a custom interface or type alias is the most effective method. This aligns with the general practice of defining data structures in TypeScript.
Example:
interface MyFormData {
name: string;
email: string;
address: {
street: string;
city: string;
zipCode: string;
};
// ... other fields
}
const { handleSubmit } = useForm<MyFormData>();
FieldValues
for FlexibilityWhile not directly providing a structure, React Hook Form offers the FieldValues
type which can be used as a base for your custom types. This provides some level of type safety and compatibility with the library.
Example:
import { FieldValues } from 'react-hook-form';
interface MyFormData extends FieldValues {
// Additional properties specific to your form
customField: string;
}
FieldValues
as a base for custom types if needed.Modern React.js is prone to too many re-renders if done wrong.
One part that is of a higher risk, are contexts.
The reason for this is how they cause re-renders in children of the context provider.
The re-render is typically done due to a state change via useState or useReducer.
As long as this is done properly, this should not be an issue.
However, in more complex contexts, the data could change reference at some levels but not at others.
There is also the issue of setters in contexts. If a setter is used, should the whole object change reference? The function too? Just the main data reference?
Just to make sure, I asked Bard AI to get some inspiration:
In React with Redux, reducers ideally should return a new object every time, even if there’s no state change. Here’s why:
Immutability: This is a core principle in Redux. By returning a new object, you avoid accidentally modifying the existing state. This makes reasoning about state updates easier and prevents unintended side effects.
Performance Optimization: Redux relies on shallow comparison to detect state changes. Returning a new object, even an identical one, forces a re-render of components that rely on that state. This can trigger optimizations in React’s virtual DOM, potentially improving performance.
There might be cases where the reducer can return the original state if there’s no change. However, it’s generally considered a best practice to always return a new object. This ensures consistency and avoids potential bugs.
Here are some ways to achieve this:
Spread Operator (...
): This is a common approach. You can copy the existing state and modify specific properties within the new object.
Immutable.js Library: This library provides helper functions for creating and manipulating immutable data structures.
Remember, even if the reducer doesn’t modify the state, returning a new object can still benefit readability and maintainability of your code.
You’re right, there’s a potential issue when using useCallback
with a context that changes on every render. Here’s how to address it:
The Problem:
useCallback
memorizes a function based on its reference. If the context containing setData
changes on every render, useCallback
will create a new function reference each time. This defeats the purpose of useCallback
as child components will receive a new function on every render, even if the logic within the function hasn’t changed.
Solutions:
Prevent Context from Changing Unnecessarily:
Extract setData
Outside of useCallback
:
setData
from the context outside of the useCallback
function. This way, you only capture the reference to the function itself, not the context that might change.Here’s an example:
const MyContext = React.createContext();
const MyComponent = () => {
const context = useContext(MyContext);
// Extract setData outside of useCallback
const setData = context.setData;
const memoizedFunction = useCallback(() => {
// Use setData here
setData(/* your arguments */);
}, [/* no dependencies */]);
return (
{/* ... */}
);
};
Combine useCallback
with useMemo
:
setData
reference within the useCallback
function. Here, you can combine useCallback
with useMemo
to create a memoized function that references the current setData
function from the context.const memoizedFunction = useCallback(() => {
const context = useContext(MyContext);
const setData = context.setData;
return () => {
// Use setData here
setData(/* your arguments */);
}
}, [context]); // useCallback depends on context changes
Choosing the Right Approach:
The best solution depends on your specific use case. If you can prevent unnecessary context updates, that’s ideal. Otherwise, consider extracting setData
or using the combination of useCallback
and useMemo
.
No, the context reference ideally shouldn’t change on every data change, especially in the scenario you describe where data
is the primary data store and setData
is the update function. Here’s why:
Unnecessary Re-renders: If the context reference changes with every data update, components that rely on useContext
will re-render even if the data itself hasn’t changed. This can lead to performance issues, especially for deeply nested components.
useCallback
Issues: As you mentioned previously, useCallback
relies on reference equality. Changing the context reference with every update will defeat the purpose of useCallback
in child components.
Better Practices for Context Updates:
Here are some approaches to keep the context reference stable while updating data:
Immutable Updates:
data
property within the context by creating a new object with the updated value. You can use the spread operator (...
) to achieve this:const MyContext = React.createContext({ data: [], setData: () => {} });
const updateData = (newData) => {
dispatch({ type: 'UPDATE_DATA', data: newData });
};
const reducer = (state, action) => {
switch (action.type) {
case 'UPDATE_DATA':
return { ...state, data: action.data };
default:
return state;
}
};
Context with Reducer:
useMemo
for Selective Updates:
useMemo
to create a memoized value derived from the context data. This memoized value will only update when its dependencies (specific parts of the data) change, preventing unnecessary re-renders.By following these practices, you can ensure that your context reference remains stable while effectively managing data updates in your React application.
As can be seen by this dialogue: