Add initial implementation #1

bsonntag · 2019-07-25T10:25:12Z

This PR adds the initial implementation which includes:

the FormProvider component;
the useForm hook;
the useFormActions hook;
the useFormState hook;
the useField hook;
the useFieldActions hook.

flaviocastro · 2019-07-26T09:11:59Z

.babelrc.js

+  plugins: [
+    ['module-resolver', {
+      alias: {
+        'package.json': './package.json',


Check if you will need this.

flaviocastro · 2019-07-26T09:19:18Z

src/context/field-actions-context.js

+ */
+
+type FieldActionsContextType = {
+  blurField: (field: string) => void,


WDYT of string => void or if you really want to be descriptive, (fieldName: string) => void.

flaviocastro · 2019-07-26T09:34:46Z

src/hooks/use-field.js

+  }, [field, focusField]);
+
+  return {
+    error: get(errors, field, null),


According to useFormState type, the errors, meta and values always exist, so what do you think of abstaining from using lodash and replacing those get's with optional chaining.

flaviocastro · 2019-07-26T09:42:54Z

src/hooks/use-form.js

+      return {
+        ...state,
+        [payload.field]: {
+          ...get(state, [payload.field]),


...get(state, payload.field),, also, IMO we could try to abstain from using lodash.

flaviocastro · 2019-07-26T10:18:06Z

test/src/hooks/use-field.test.js

+    result.current.onBlur();
+
+    expect(actions.blurField).toHaveBeenCalledTimes(1);
+    expect(actions.blurField).toHaveBeenCalledWith('foo');


We could also have tests for these same flows for the field meta state, checking the active and the touched values.

I'm testing that in the useForm tests.

flaviocastro · 2019-07-26T10:23:41Z

src/utils/validate.js

+
+function getErrorRule(error) {
+  switch (error.keyword) {
+    case 'additionalProperties':


Why the need to rename this error type?
IMO it can still be an additionalProperties error type.
This way we don't change the ajv API errors.

flaviocastro · 2019-07-26T10:25:47Z

src/hooks/use-form.js

+  }, [initialValues]);
+
+  const submit = useCallback((event: ?SyntheticInputEvent<any>) => {
+    if (event && event.preventDefault) {


According to SyntheticInputEvent type, if it exists it will always have a preventDefault method. Validating that preventDefault exists, doesn't validate that it's a function, invoking it will throw an error.

flaviocastro · 2019-07-26T11:28:21Z

.babelrc.js

@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+/**


Add empty line before.

flaviocastro · 2019-07-26T11:28:22Z

.babelrc.js

@@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
+/**


Add empty line before.

flaviocastro · 2019-07-26T11:32:58Z

src/hooks/use-form.js

+  REGISTER_FIELD: 'REGISTER_FIELD',
+  RESET: 'RESET',
+  SET_FIELD_VALUE: 'SET_FIELD_VALUE',
+  SUBMIT_END: 'SUBMIT_END',


Rename this SUBMIT_END to SUBMIT_SUCCESS.

flaviocastro · 2019-07-26T11:34:03Z

src/hooks/use-form.js

+      }
+
+      return result;
+    });


Shouldn't this have a cath?
Also, couldn't finally dispatch the actionTypes.SUBMIT_END?

I added the rejection callback to the then to handle onSubmit errors.

I also had to remove the cancellation logic, because the first dispatch in the effect was making the effect re-run and cancel the request.

bsonntag assigned rafaelcruzazevedo Jul 25, 2019

bsonntag requested review from rafaelcruzazevedo and flaviocastro July 25, 2019 10:25

flaviocastro suggested changes Jul 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

bsonntag added 5 commits July 26, 2019 12:17

Add package.json

8b5d521

Add yarn.lock

91b1c70

Add license

836c892

Add .gitignore

c5cb07e

Add eslint configuration

5edeceb

bsonntag force-pushed the feature/initial-implementation branch from 3366c70 to cf6ff75 Compare July 26, 2019 11:17

bsonntag requested a review from flaviocastro July 26, 2019 11:18

flaviocastro suggested changes Jul 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

bsonntag added 2 commits July 26, 2019 12:44

Add babel configuration

476cbbd

Add flow configuration

18ae842

bsonntag force-pushed the feature/initial-implementation branch from cf6ff75 to ef6d51c Compare July 26, 2019 11:44

bsonntag requested a review from flaviocastro July 26, 2019 11:50

bsonntag added 2 commits July 26, 2019 16:05

Add initial implementation

1306472

Update README.md

973dbb9

bsonntag force-pushed the feature/initial-implementation branch from ef6d51c to 973dbb9 Compare July 26, 2019 15:05

flaviocastro approved these changes Jul 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

flaviocastro merged commit 8df8ed1 into master Jul 26, 2019

flaviocastro deleted the feature/initial-implementation branch July 26, 2019 15:28

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add initial implementation #1

Add initial implementation #1

bsonntag commented Jul 25, 2019

flaviocastro Jul 26, 2019

flaviocastro Jul 26, 2019

flaviocastro Jul 26, 2019

flaviocastro Jul 26, 2019

flaviocastro Jul 26, 2019

bsonntag Jul 26, 2019

flaviocastro Jul 26, 2019

flaviocastro Jul 26, 2019

flaviocastro Jul 26, 2019

bsonntag Jul 26, 2019

flaviocastro Jul 26, 2019

flaviocastro Jul 26, 2019

flaviocastro Jul 26, 2019

bsonntag Jul 26, 2019

bsonntag Jul 26, 2019

Add initial implementation #1

Add initial implementation #1

Conversation

bsonntag commented Jul 25, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment