[Question] `handleChangeValue` and `touched` about formik HOT 4 CLOSED

The initial thinking was that handleChangeValue would mostly be used with custom inputs which don’t always expose legit onBlur. However I now agree that that is asymmetric.

Instead there should be a handleBlurValue and handleChangeValue should accept an optional 3rd argument to blur.

Which brings me to my next point which is that handleChangeValue/handleBlurValue should probably be named differently as they are not really event handlers, they should be like setFieldValue and setFieldTouched

from formik.

Yeah I think you're right. What if we broke out to:

setValue(field, value) - sets the field value but does not set touched state
touchValue(field, value) - sets and touches the field value
touchField(field) - touches the field

from formik.

@eonwhite

touched doesn't have a singular in english that makes any sense.

What about this API?

// values
handleChange: (e) => void
setFieldValue: (field: string, value: any, touch?: boolean)  => void
setValues: (values: V) => void

// errors
setFieldError: (field: string, msg: string) => void
setErrors: (errorsObject: FormikError) => void

// touched 
handleBlur: (e) => void
setFieldTouched: (field: string, value: boolean)  => void
setTouched: (touchedObject: FormikTouched) => void

// error
setError: (e: any) => void

from formik.

I think the above API looks good and consistent to me.

The one I'm still a little uncertain about is the optional touch? parameter on setFieldValue. It means the component is implementing a callback signature that seems slightly idiosyncratic and specific to Formik, reducing reusability of the component in non-Formik forms.

But it feels appropriate to give the component control over when and whether to perform a touch, rather than leaving that up to the user of the component, so I think it's probably worth the tradeoff.

from formik.