By the time you pass the prop value
to useState
the value of it can be yet to set. value
itself might have been undefined
yet.
Also setState
is not truly sync so if the useState
uses same mechanism as setState
your state val
might not be set to value
yet as the initial value.
In such cases, using props as the initial values to states, you should use a side effect with no dependency. Once the first render achieved the effect will run and set your state with prop. You can let the initial value of the component be undefined passing nothing with no problems.
export const MakeComponent = props => {
const { path, value, info, update } = props;
const [val, setVal] = useState();
// get initial state after initial render
useEffect(() => {
setVal(value)
}, [])
console.log(value, val); // abc undefined then will log abc abc
return (...)
}
Just keep in mind that props in React are meant to be read-only, state is for read and write. But it is perfectly fine, and no not an anti pattern, if you use a prop just as an initial value for a state and use the state you have set with the prop after that instead of the prop. That is for consistency since you might have two different values at a time from a prop and a state in circumstances.
Your case might need to care for the value of the prop at an arbitrary time depending on you needs as stressed in one of the above answers. You question does not state that. Still, if so, you can add the prop to the dependency array of the effect that sets the state with that prop, and yes write separate effects for other props you want the same, well, effect.
If you don't need writing for that data you do not need that pattern at all, just use prop and it will be up to date and you will have consistency. But you apparently do so I hope the pattern I suggest above works for you as it does for me.
MakeComponent
?{...props}
how it looks like? Could you post code for the parent component?value
prop is initiallyundefined
and updated later on, so the state is initialized asundefined