227

Considering below hooks example

   import { useState } from 'react';

   function Example() {
       const [count, setCount] = useState(0);

       return (
           <div>
               <p>You clicked {count} times</p>
               <button onClick={() => setCount(count + 1)}>
                  Click me
               </button>
          </div>
        );
     }

Basically we use this.forceUpdate() method to force the component to re-render immediately in React class components like below example

    class Test extends Component{
        constructor(props){
             super(props);
             this.state = {
                 count:0,
                 count2: 100
             }
             this.setCount = this.setCount.bind(this);//how can I do this with hooks in functional component 
        }
        setCount(){
              let count = this.state.count;
                   count = count+1;
              let count2 = this.state.count2;
                   count2 = count2+1;
              this.setState({count});
              this.forceUpdate();
              //before below setState the component will re-render immediately when this.forceUpdate() is called
              this.setState({count2: count
        }

        render(){
              return (<div>
                   <span>Count: {this.state.count}></span>. 
                   <button onClick={this.setCount}></button>
                 </div>
        }
 }

But my query is How can I force above functional component to re-render immediately with hooks?

4
  • 1
    Can you post a version of your original component that uses the this.forceUpdate()? Maybe there's a way to accomplish the same thing without that.
    – Jacob
    Commented Nov 8, 2018 at 20:04
  • The last line in setCount is truncated. It's unclear what's the purpose of setCount in its current state. Commented Nov 8, 2018 at 20:42
  • That’s just an action after this.forceUpdate(); I added that just to explain about this.forceUpdate() in my question Commented Nov 9, 2018 at 2:26
  • 1
    For what it's worth: I was wrestling with this because I thought I needed a manual re-render, and finally realized that I simply needed to move an externally held variable into a state hook and leverage the setting function, which fixed all my problems without a re-render. Not to say that it's never needed, but it's worth taking a third and fourth look to see if it's actually needed in your specific use case. Commented Apr 4, 2020 at 16:51

20 Answers 20

149

This is possible with useState or useReducer, since useState uses useReducer internally:

const [, updateState] = React.useState();
const forceUpdate = React.useCallback(() => updateState({}), []);

forceUpdate isn't intended to be used under normal circumstances, only in testing or other outstanding cases. This situation may be addressed in a more conventional way.

setCount is an example of improperly used forceUpdate, setState is asynchronous for performance reasons and shouldn't be forced to be synchronous just because state updates weren't performed correctly. If a state relies on previously set state, this should be done with updater function,

If you need to set the state based on the previous state, read about the updater argument below.

<...>

Both state and props received by the updater function are guaranteed to be up-to-date. The output of the updater is shallowly merged with state.

setCount may not be an illustrative example because its purpose is unclear but this is the case for updater function:

setCount(){
  this.setState(({count}) => ({ count: count + 1 }));
  this.setState(({count2}) => ({ count2: count + 1 }));
  this.setState(({count}) => ({ count2: count + 1 }));
}

This is translated 1:1 to hooks, with the exception that functions that are used as callbacks should better be memoized:

   const [state, setState] = useState({ count: 0, count2: 100 });

   const setCount = useCallback(() => {
     setState(({count}) => ({ count: count + 1 }));
     setState(({count2}) => ({ count2: count + 1 }));
     setState(({count}) => ({ count2: count + 1 }));
   }, []);
7
  • How does const forceUpdate = useCallback(() => updateState({}), []); work? Does it even force an update? Commented Nov 7, 2019 at 10:44
  • 4
    @DávidMolnár useCallback memoizes forceUpdate, so it stays constant during component lifespan and can be passed as a prop safely. updateState({}) updates the state with new object on each forceUpdate call, this results in a re-render. So yes, it forces an update when being called. Commented Nov 7, 2019 at 11:02
  • 4
    So, the useCallback part is not really necessary. It should just work fine without it. Commented Nov 7, 2019 at 11:03
  • 1
    @Andru Yes, a state is updated once because 0===0. Yes, an array will work because it's an object too. Anything that doesn't pass equality check can be used, like updateState(Math.random()), or a counter. Commented Oct 22, 2020 at 10:17
  • 1
    One negligible difference between setState and forceUpdate is that, forceUpdate skips shouldComponentUpdate invocation. But with hooks there is no option to skip React.memo.
    – Easwar
    Commented Feb 18, 2021 at 13:26
81

React Hooks FAQ official solution for forceUpdate:

const [_, forceUpdate] = useReducer((x) => x + 1, 0);
// usage
<button onClick={forceUpdate}>Force update</button>

Working example

const App = () => {
  const [_, forceUpdate] = useReducer((x) => x + 1, 0);

  return (
    <div>
      <button onClick={forceUpdate}>Force update</button>
      <p>Forced update {_} times</p>
    </div>
  );
};

ReactDOM.render(<App />, document.getElementById("root"));
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react/16.10.1/umd/react.production.min.js" integrity="sha256-vMEjoeSlzpWvres5mDlxmSKxx6jAmDNY4zCt712YCI0=" crossorigin="anonymous"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/react-dom/16.10.1/umd/react-dom.production.min.js" integrity="sha256-QQt6MpTdAD0DiPLhqhzVyPs1flIdstR4/R7x4GqCvZ4=" crossorigin="anonymous"></script>
<script>var useReducer = React.useReducer</script>
<div id="root"></div>

73

Generally, you can use any state handling approach you want to trigger an update.

With TypeScript

codesandbox example

useState

const forceUpdate: () => void = React.useState({})[1].bind(null, {})  // see NOTE below

useReducer (recommended)

const forceUpdate = React.useReducer(() => ({}), {})[1] as () => void

as custom hook

Just wrap whatever approach you prefer like this

function useForceUpdate(): () => void {
  return React.useReducer(() => ({}), {})[1] as () => void // <- paste here
}

How this works?

"To trigger an update" means to tell React engine that some value has changed and that it should rerender your component.

[, setState] from useState() requires a parameter. We get rid of it by binding a fresh object {}.
() => ({}) in useReducer is a dummy reducer that returns a fresh object each time an action is dispatched.
{} (fresh object) is required so that it triggers an update by changing a reference in the state.

PS: useState just wraps useReducer internally, so use reducer to reduce complexity. source

NOTE: Referential instability

Using .bind with useState causes a change in function reference between renders.
It is possible to wrap it inside useCallback as already explained in this answer here, but then it wouldn't be a sexy one-liner™. The Reducer version already keeps reference equality (stability) between renders. This is important if you want to pass the forceUpdate function in props to another component.

plain JS

const forceUpdate = React.useState({})[1].bind(null, {})  // see NOTE above
const forceUpdate = React.useReducer(() => ({}))[1]
3
  • Wouldn't this result in hooks being called a varying number of times between renders if forceUpdate is called conditionally, which would break the rules of hooks and potentially leave hooks accessing the wrong data? Commented Mar 2, 2021 at 18:49
  • 1
    @user56reinstatemonica8 This is basically just a state assignment which triggers the render, nothing quirky.
    – Qwerty
    Commented Mar 2, 2021 at 19:27
  • 4
    I had to use the following for the typescript useState solution const forceUpdate: () => void = React.useState({})[1].bind(null, {}); otherwise I got a type error that the useState type was wrong
    – SamB
    Commented Dec 20, 2021 at 0:10
43

As the others have mentioned, useState works - here is how mobx-react-lite implements updates - you could do something similar.

Define a new hook, useForceUpdate -

import { useState, useCallback } from 'react'

export function useForceUpdate() {
  const [, setTick] = useState(0);
  const update = useCallback(() => {
    setTick(tick => tick + 1);
  }, [])
  return update;
}

and use it in a component -

const forceUpdate = useForceUpdate();
if (...) {
  forceUpdate(); // force re-render
}

See https://github.com/mobxjs/mobx-react-lite/blob/master/src/utils.ts and https://github.com/mobxjs/mobx-react-lite/blob/master/src/useObserver.ts

2
  • 3
    From what I understand from hooks, this might not work as useForceUpdate will return a new function everytime the function re-renders. For forceUpdate to work when used in a useEffect, it should return useCallback(update) See kentcdodds.com/blog/usememo-and-usecallback Commented Sep 12, 2019 at 4:54
  • Thanks, @MartinRatinaud - yes, it might cause a memory leak without useCallback (?) - fixed. Commented Sep 13, 2019 at 7:20
32

Alternative to @MinhKha's answer:

It can be much cleaner with useReducer:

const [, forceUpdate] = useReducer(x => x + 1, 0);

Usage: forceUpdate() - cleaner without params

16

You can simply define the useState like that:

const [, forceUpdate] = React.useState(0);

And usage: forceUpdate(n => !n)

Hope this help !

3
  • 13
    Will fail if forceUpdate is called even number of times per render.
    – Izhaki
    Commented Nov 7, 2019 at 23:17
  • 2
    Just keep incrementing the value.
    – Gary
    Commented Mar 10, 2020 at 2:58
  • 3
    This is error-prone and should be removed or edited.
    – slikts
    Commented Apr 2, 2020 at 9:58
15

Simple code

const forceUpdate = React.useReducer(bool => !bool, true)[1];

Use:

forceUpdate();
1
  • 1
    One should probably provide an initialization value to avoid a TypeScript error (e.g. useReducer(bool => !bool, true)[1]). But otherwise … thumbs up for this solution! I find this solution so much nicer than the example from the official docs which potentially increments a useless state value to infinity.
    – Philzen
    Commented Jul 8, 2022 at 5:16
14

You should preferably only have your component depend on state and props and it will work as expected, but if you really need a function to force the component to re-render, you could use the useState hook and call the function when needed.

Example

const { useState, useEffect } = React;

function Foo() {
  const [, forceUpdate] = useState();

  useEffect(() => {
    setTimeout(forceUpdate, 2000);
  }, []);

  return <div>{Date.now()}</div>;
}

ReactDOM.render(<Foo />, document.getElementById("root"));
<script src="https://unpkg.com/[email protected]/umd/react.production.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://unpkg.com/[email protected]/umd/react-dom.production.min.js"></script>

<div id="root"></div>

5
  • Ok but why React has introduced this.forceUpdate(); in first place when component re-renders with setState in earlier versions ? Commented Nov 8, 2018 at 20:19
  • 1
    @Think-Twice I have personally never used it, and I can't think of a good use case for it right now, but I guess it's an escape hatch for those really special use cases. "Normally you should try to avoid all uses of forceUpdate() and only read from this.props and this.state in render()."
    – Tholle
    Commented Nov 8, 2018 at 20:21
  • 1
    Agreed. I even never used that in my experience but I know how it works so just trying to understand how the same thing can be done in hooks Commented Nov 9, 2018 at 2:29
  • 1
    @Tholle and I can't think of a good use case for it right now I have one, how about if state is not controlled by React. I don't use Redux, but I'm assuming it must do some sort of forceupdate. I personally use proxy's to maintain state, the component can then check for prop changes and then update. Seems to work very efficiently too. Eg., all my components are then controlled by a proxy, this proxy is backed by SessionStorage, so even if the user refreshes his webpage, state of even dropdowns etc, are maintained. IOW: I don't use state at all, everything is controlled with props.
    – Keith
    Commented Dec 11, 2018 at 10:39
  • @Tholle ok but if I want to rerender component and don't have possibility to pass changed props from parent component?
    – Matley
    Commented Aug 30, 2023 at 10:15
9

Potential option is to force update only on specific component using key. Updating the key trigger a rendering of the component (which failed to update before)

For example:

const [tableKey, setTableKey] = useState(1);
...

useEffect(() => {
    ...
    setTableKey(tableKey + 1);
}, [tableData]);

...
<DataTable
    key={tableKey}
    data={tableData}/>
4
  • 1
    This is often the cleanest way if there is a 1:1 relationship between a state value and the requirement to re-render.
    – jaimefps
    Commented Mar 2, 2020 at 22:45
  • 1
    this is an easy solution
    – Priyanka V
    Commented Aug 29, 2020 at 17:07
  • Note this completely remounts the <DataTable /> component instead of rerendering it
    – bryanph
    Commented Jun 3, 2022 at 9:44
  • THIS IS THE EASIEST solution! I had a problem with one of my components that didn't want to re-render after the state was changed from child... actually this was 1st time I faced a problem like that😀 Commented Jun 25, 2022 at 16:51
6

You can (ab)use normal hooks to force a rerender by taking advantage of the fact that React doesn't print booleans in JSX code

// create a hook
const [forceRerender, setForceRerender] = React.useState(true);

// ...put this line where you want to force a rerender
setForceRerender(!forceRerender);

// ...make sure that {forceRerender} is "visible" in your js code
// ({forceRerender} will not actually be visible since booleans are
// not printed, but updating its value will nonetheless force a
// rerender)
return (
  <div>{forceRerender}</div>
)

3
  • 1
    In this case, when setBoolean changes twice children React.useEffect might not recoginze the update.
    – alma
    Commented Sep 11, 2019 at 2:43
  • As far as I understand it React treats every boolean update as a reason to rerender the page even if the boolean switches back again quickly. That said, React is of course not a standard, and exactly how it works in this instance is undefined and subject to change.
    – Fergie
    Commented Sep 11, 2019 at 8:00
  • 1
    I don't know. For some reason I'm attracted to this version. It tickles me :-). Besides which, it feel pure. Something changed that my JSX depends upon, so I rerender. It's invisibility doesn't detract from that IMO. Commented Aug 4, 2020 at 15:17
5

react-tidy has a custom hook just for doing that called useRefresh:

import React from 'react'
import {useRefresh} from 'react-tidy'

function App() {
  const refresh = useRefresh()
  return (
    <p>
      The time is {new Date()} <button onClick={refresh}>Refresh</button>
    </p>
  )
}

Learn more about this hook

Disclaimer I am the writer of this library.

4

My variation of forceUpdate is not via a counter but rather via an object:

// Emulates `forceUpdate()`
const [unusedState, setUnusedState] = useState()
const forceUpdate = useCallback(() => setUnusedState({}), [])

Because {} !== {} every time.

1
  • What is useCallback()? Where did that come from? oops. I see it now...
    – zipzit
    Commented Mar 27, 2020 at 23:17
4

One line solution:

const useForceUpdate = () => useState()[1];

useState returns a pair of values: the current state and a function that updates it - state and setter, here we are using only the setter in order to force re-render.

3

Solution in one single line:

const [,forceRender] = useReducer((s) => s+1, 0)

You can learn about useReducer here. https://reactjs.org/docs/hooks-reference.html#usereducer

3

There are many ways to force re-render in Hook.

For me simple way with useState() and tip of reference object values.

const [, forceRender] = useState({});

// Anywhre
forceRender({});

Codesandbox Example

0
3
const useForceRender = () => {
  const [, forceRender] = useReducer(x => !x, true)
  return forceRender
}

Usage

function Component () {
  const forceRender = useForceRender() 
  useEffect(() => {
    // ...
    forceRender()
  }, [])
2

This will render depending components 3 times (arrays with equal elements aren't equal):

const [msg, setMsg] = useState([""])

setMsg(["test"])
setMsg(["test"])
setMsg(["test"])
2
  • 1
    I believe you don't even need to put an item in the array. An empty array doesn't strictly equal to another empty array simply by different reference, just like objects.
    – Qwerty
    Commented Feb 5, 2020 at 13:37
  • yep, just wanted to show that as a way of passing data Commented Feb 6, 2020 at 14:20
1

For regular React Class based components, refer to React Docs for the forceUpdate api at this URL. The docs mention that:

Normally you should try to avoid all uses of forceUpdate() and only read from this.props and this.state in render()

However, it is also mentioned in the docs that:

If your render() method depends on some other data, you can tell React that the component needs re-rendering by calling forceUpdate().

So, although use cases for using forceUpdate might be rare, and I have not used it ever, however I have seen it used by other developers in some legacy corporate projects that I have worked on.

So, for the equivalent functionality for Functional Components, refer to the React Docs for HOOKS at this URL. Per the above URL, one can use the "useReducer" hook to provide a forceUpdate functionality for Functional Components.

A working code sample that does not use state or props is provided below, which is also available on CodeSandbox at this URL

import React, { useReducer, useRef } from "react";
import ReactDOM from "react-dom";

import "./styles.css";

function App() {
  // Use the useRef hook to store a mutable value inside a functional component for the counter
  let countref = useRef(0);

  const [, forceUpdate] = useReducer(x => x + 1, 0);

  function handleClick() {
    countref.current++;
    console.log("Count = ", countref.current);
    forceUpdate(); // If you comment this out, the date and count in the screen will not be updated
  }

  return (
    <div className="App">
      <h1> {new Date().toLocaleString()} </h1>
      <h2>You clicked {countref.current} times</h2>
      <button
        onClick={() => {
          handleClick();
        }}
      >
        ClickToUpdateDateAndCount
      </button>
    </div>
  );
}

const rootElement = document.getElementById("root");
ReactDOM.render(<App />, rootElement);

NOTE: An alternate approach using the useState hook (instead of useReducer) is also available at this URL.

0

A bit late to the party but I notice that most (all) of the answers have missed the part where you can pass a callback to forceUpdate lifecycle method.

As per the react source code, this callback has the same behavior as the one in the setState method - it is executed after the update.

Hence, the most correct implementation would be like this:

    /**
 * Increments the state which causes a rerender and executes a callback
 * @param {function} callback - callback to execute after state update
 * @returns {function}
 */
export const useForceUpdate = (callback) => {
    const [state, updater] = useReducer((x) => x + 1, 0);

    useEffect(() => {
        callback && callback();
    }, [state]);

    return useCallback(() => {
        updater();
    }, []);
};

0

I was working with an array and spotted this issue. However, instead of explicit forceUpdate I found another approach - to deconstruct an array and set a new value for it using this code:

    setRoutes(arr => [...arr, newRoute]); // add new elements to the array
    setRouteErrors(routeErrs => [...routeErrs]); // the array elements were changed

I found it very interesting that setting even a copy of an array will not trigger the hook. I assume React does the shallow comparison

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.