reduce-reducers | Reduce multiple reducers into a single reducer | State Container library

Nesting reducers is a bad practice. You will want to keep your reducers (and state slices) as flat as possible. Hence, splitting will yield a better developing experience in terms of updating slices of your state. Check combineReducers().

Consider refactoring your reducer's from switch formation

yarn upgrade does not update package.json, only the lock file. Actually, none of the yarn upgrade flags do. There's a long discussion about this in here

You can do the following:

• Reinstall React with yarn add react@latest
• Install a npm package to check updates, for example, npm-check-updates. Run it to update package.json and then try yarn install.
• Or you can install that specific React version yarn upgrade react@16.8.2.

This is the intended behaviour, even though it is very confusing in the docs.

A reducer is simple a function that take state and action and returns a new state object, so I think this would do what you want..

redux-offline injects it's own reducer dynamically so you'll not be able to access it via your top level reducers. redux-offline exposes it's queue via the config which will allow you to update the outbox to remove/add actions. If you want to remove an offline action whilst the user is offline I'd suggest making an offline action call with a specific action type (e.g. 'CANCEL_OFFLINE_ACTION') and handling it in queue.enqueue to remove the action in the outbox that you don't want to propagate.

Here's a rough example:

reducers is just a JavaScript array, and reducers.reduce is therefore good ol' Array.reduce. This takes a reducing function and an initial value to reduce. The reducing function can take four parameters but we only care about the first two here:

• accumulator: the object gradually being built, returned at the end of the reduce
• currentValue: the current array element

p and r are the accumulator and currentValue, above. p starts out with the value of previous. This is an array of functions (each reducer in turn is represented by r) so calling:

Per the Redux FAQ entry on sharing state between slice reducers:

Many users later want to try to share data between two reducers, but find that combineReducers does not allow them to do so. There are several approaches that can be used:

• If a reducer needs to know data from another slice of state, the state tree shape may need to be reorganized so that a single reducer is handling more of the data.
• You may need to write some custom functions for handling some of these actions. This may require replacing combineReducers with your own top-level reducer function. You can also use a utility such as reduce-reducers to run combineReducers to handle most actions, but also run a more specialized reducer for specific actions that cross state slices.
• Async action creators such as redux-thunk have access to the entire state through getState(). An action creator can retrieve additional data from the state and put it in an action, so that each reducer has enough information to update its own state slice.

There's also many other third-party reducer utilities available, and some of those may be useful. In particular, you might want to look at ryo33/combine-section-reducers, convoyinc/combined-reduction, and KodersLab/topologically-combine-reducers.

update

Per your question about why "r isn't a reducer", right now you have: