🚀 Day 12: Enhancing State Management using useReducer in React 🚀

Exploring useReducer in React: Enhancing State Management

Welcome to Day 12 of my React learning journey! Today, I immersed myself in the useReducer hook, discovering how it serves as a powerful alternative to useState, particularly for managing more complex state logic in React applications. I decided to refactor the code for my project, 'PackPal' (which I started on Day 10), to integrate useReducer. Here’s what I learned from the process, the benefits I noticed, and how it compares to useState.

---

Understanding useReducer

The useReducer hook caught my attention because it’s tailored for situations where state transitions involve multiple sub-values or when the next state depends heavily on the previous one. I found the basic syntax to be:

const [state, dispatch] = useReducer(reducer, initialState);

• reducer: A function that determines how the state changes based on an action.
• initialState: The starting state value.
• state: The current state value.
• dispatch: A function to send actions to the reducer.

Why I Chose to Explore useReducer

While useState has been my go-to for straightforward state updates, I realized that useReducer offers more control and structure, which is especially valuable for complex state logic. I noticed that it centralizes state management within a reducer function, making the code cleaner and easier to maintain.

Comparing useState and useReducer

Here’s what I observed during the comparison:

Code Size: Initially, useState felt more concise since I didn’t have to write a reducer or dispatch actions. However, as I refactored more of my code, I noticed that useReducer actually reduced code duplication, especially when several event handlers needed to modify state in similar ways.

Readability: I found useState easy to read for simple updates. But when the updates became more complex, the component started feeling bloated. useReducer helped me by separating the update logic (how state changes) from the event handlers (what happens), which made the code more organized.

Debugging: Tracking down bugs in state updates was sometimes tricky with useState. With useReducer, I could log every action and state update, making it much easier to pinpoint issues.

Testing: Since reducers are pure functions, I realized I could test them in isolation, outside of the component. This was particularly useful for complex state logic, as it allowed me to assert that a reducer produced the correct state for given inputs.

Writing Reducers Well

I learned some key points about writing reducers:

• Reducers Must Be Pure: This means they return the same output for the same input without causing side effects, which is crucial since reducers run during rendering.

• Each Action Describes a Single User Interaction: Even if an action leads to multiple state changes, encapsulating it in a single action made my code easier to debug and understand.

Refactoring with useReducer

Here’s a breakdown of how I refactored my code to use useReducer, replacing useState:

1. Initializing State with useReducer

Initially, I managed a list of items using useState:

const [items, setItems] = useState([]);

I refactored this to use useReducer:

const [items, dispatch] = useReducer(itemsReducer, []);

Here, items holds the current state, and dispatch triggers actions that update the state.

2. Handling Actions with dispatch

With useReducer, I learned to handle state updates by sending actions to the reducer via the dispatch function. Here’s how I approached it:

Previously, I used useState:

function handleAddItem(item) {
    setItems((items) => [...items, item]);
}

function handleDeleteItem(id) {
    setItems((items) => items.filter((item) => item.id !== id));
}

function handleToggleItem(id) {
    setItems((items) =>
    items.map((item) =>
        item.id === id ? { ...item, packed: !item.packed } : item
    )
);
}

function handleClearList() {
    const confirm = window.confirm(
        "Are you sure you want to clear the list?"
    );

    if (confirm) setItems([]);
}

With useReducer, I switched to:

function handleAddItem(item) {
    dispatch({ type: "add_item", item });
}

function handleDeleteItem(id) {
    dispatch({ type: "delete_item", id });
}

function handleToggleItem(id) {
    dispatch({ type: "toggle_item", id });
}

function handleClearList() {
    const confirm = window.confirm(
        "Are you sure you want to clear the list?"
    );

    if (confirm) dispatch({ type: "clear_items" });
}

3. The Reducer Function

Here’s how my itemsReducer function ended up looking, handling all state transitions based on the dispatched actions:

function itemsReducer(state, action) {
    switch (action.type) {
        case "add_item":
            return [...state, action.item];
        case "delete_item":
            return state.filter((item) => item.id !== action.id);
        case "toggle_item":
            return state.map((item) =>
                item.id === action.id
                    ? { ...item, packed: !item.packed }
                    : item
            );
        case "clear_items":
            return [];
        default:
            throw new Error(`Unknown action type: ${action.type}`);
    }
}

---

Conclusion

Refactoring my code to use useReducer made my state management more organized and maintainable. While useReducer required more setup than useState, the benefits became clear when dealing with complex state logic. This experience showed me how introducing more structure with useReducer could potentially help avoid bugs and make the code easier to test and debug.

You can find the full code here. I’m excited to keep learning and share more insights as I continue to explore React!

Stay updated with my progress by following my LinkedIn.

• https://www.linkedin.com/in/mayuresh-surve/