可以将文章内容翻译成中文,广告屏蔽插件可能会导致该功能失效(如失效,请关闭广告屏蔽插件后再试):
问题:
I am using Redux. In my reducer I'm trying to remove a property from an object like this:
const state = {
a: '1',
b: '2',
c: {
x: '42',
y: '43'
},
}
And I want to have something like this without having to mutate the original state:
const newState = {
a: '1',
b: '2',
c: {
x: '42',
},
}
I tried:
let newState = Object.assign({}, state);
delete newState.c.y
but for some reasons, it deletes the property from both states.
Could help me to do that?
回答1:
How about using destructuring assignment syntax?
const original = {
foo: 'bar',
stack: 'overflow',
};
// If the name of the property to remove is constant
const { stack, ...withoutFirst } = original;
console.log(withoutFirst); // Will be { "foo": "bar" }
// If the name of the property to remove is from a variable
const key = 'stack'
const { [key]: value, ...withoutSecond } = original;
console.log(withoutSecond); // Will be { "foo": "bar" }
// To do a deep removal with property names from variables
const deep = {
foo: 'bar',
c: {
x: 1,
y: 2
}
};
const parentKey = 'c';
const childKey = 'y';
// Remove the 'c' element from original
const { [parentKey]: parentValue, ...noChild } = deep;
// Remove the 'y' from the 'c' element
const { [childKey]: removedValue, ...childWithout } = parentValue;
// Merge back together
const withoutThird = { ...noChild, [parentKey]: childWithout };
console.log(withoutThird); // Will be { "foo": "bar", "c": { "x": 1 } }
回答2:
I find ES5 array methods like filter
, map
and reduce
useful because they always return new arrays or objects. In this case I'd use Object.keys
to iterate over the object, and Array#reduce
to turn it back into an object.
return Object.assign({}, state, {
c: Object.keys(state.c).reduce((result, key) => {
if (key !== 'y') {
result[key] = state.c[key];
}
return result;
}, {})
});
回答3:
You can use _.omit(object, [paths])
from lodash library
path can be nested for example: _.omit(object, ['key1.key2.key3'])
回答4:
That's because you are copying the value of state.c
to the other object. And that value is a pointer to another javascript object. So, both of those pointers are pointing to the same object.
Try this:
let newState = Object.assign({}, state);
console.log(newState == state); // false
console.log(newState.c == state.c); // true
newState.c = Object.assign({}, state.c);
console.log(newState.c == state.c); // now it is false
delete newState.c.y;
You can also do a deep-copy of the object. See this question and you'll find what's best for you.
回答5:
Just use ES6 object destructuring feature
const state = {
c: {
x: '42',
y: '43'
},
}
const { c: { y, ...c } } = state // generates a new 'c' without 'y'
console.log({...state, c }) // put the new c on a new state
回答6:
How about this:
function removeByKey (myObj, deleteKey) {
return Object.keys(myObj)
.filter(key => key !== deleteKey)
.reduce((result, current) => {
result[current] = myObj[current];
return result;
}, {});
}
It filters the key that should be deleted then builds a new object from the remaining keys and the initial object. The idea is stolen from Tyler McGinnes awesome reactjs program.
JSBin
回答7:
function dissoc(key, obj) {
let copy = Object.assign({}, obj)
delete copy[key]
return copy
}
Also, if looking for a functional programming toolkit, look at Ramda.
回答8:
You may use Immutability helper in order to unset an attribute, in your case:
import update from 'immutability-helper';
const updatedState = update(state, {
c: {
$unset: ['y']
}
});
回答9:
It's easy with Immutable.js:
const newState = state.deleteIn(['c', 'y']);
description of deleteIn()
回答10:
The issue you are having is that you are not deep cloning your initial state. So you have a shallow copy.
You could use spread operator
const newState = { ...state, c: { ...state.c } };
delete newState.c.y
Or following your same code
let newState = Object.assign({}, state, { c: Object.assign({}, state.c) });
delete newState.c.y
回答11:
I normally use
Object.assign({}, existingState, {propToRemove: undefined})
I realise this isn't actually removing the property but for almost all purposes 1 its functionally equivalent. The syntax for this is much simpler than the alternatives which I feel is a pretty good tradeoff.
1 If you are using hasOwnProperty()
, you will need to use the more complicated solution.
回答12:
I use this pattern
const newState = Object.assign({}, state);
delete newState.show;
return newState;
but in book i saw another pattern
return Object.assign({}, state, { name: undefined } )
回答13:
As hinted in some of the answers already, it's because you are trying to modify a nested state ie. one level deeper. A canonical solution would be to add a reducer on the x
state level:
const state = {
a: '1',
b: '2',
c: {
x: '42',
y: '43'
},
}
Deeper level reducer
let newDeepState = Object.assign({}, state.c);
delete newDeepState.y;
Original level reducer
let newState = Object.assign({}, state, {c: newDeepState});
回答14:
utility ;))
const removeObjectField = (obj, field) => {
// delete filter[selectName]; -> this mutates.
const { [field]: remove, ...rest } = obj;
return rest;
}
action type
const MY_Y_REMOVE = 'MY_Y_REMOVE';
action creator
const myYRemoveAction = (c, y) => {
const result = removeObjectField(c, y);
return dispatch =>
dispatch({
type: MY_Y_REMOVE,
payload: result
})
}
reducer
export default (state ={}, action) => {
switch (action.type) {
case myActions.MY_Y_REMOVE || :
return { ...state, c: action.payload };
default:
return state;
}
};