Add missing validationSchema to Formik context

[JoseLion]

Hi @jaredpalmer, @johnrom!

I noticed the validationSchema was missing when using useFormikContext. The types say it's there, but it always returns undefined. I took a look, and it seems it was missing from the context value definition, so I decided to open this small PR to lend a hand with this.

Hope this helps 🙂

[changeset-bot]

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: eb55e7a

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add a changeset to this PR

[vercel]

@JoseLion is attempting to deploy a commit to the Formium Team on Vercel.

A member of the Team first needs to authorize it.

[johnrom]

This is ok by me especially since it exists in the types already. The only issue I see with it is that some users may create a new Yup object on each render. and if that's the case, this prop will change on every render, and cause more updates. Not sure how much of a problem that is. I don't use Yup, so I'll defer to someone else whether that's an issue or not.

[johnrom]

related #2751

[JoseLion]

@johnrom thank you for your response 🙂 I think the most common use-case will be exactly what is mentioned in #2751. As I think about it, it seems unlikely that a new Yup object is created on each render, but it could happen. I hope it's not much of a problem because that is the only way of getting validation info into abstracted field components. 😅

[github-actions]

This pull request is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 60 days

[JoseLion]

@jaredpalmer any news on this one? It's not super critical, but I think it would be great to have this 🙂

Cheers!!

[github-actions]

This pull request is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 60 days

[noisyscanner]

Any movement on this? Would be very useful to us

[JoseLion]

I just updated the branch, so this is ready to merge if there're no concerns 🙂

[github-actions]

This pull request is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 60 days

[johnrom]

I don't think we should pass through this or the validate callback through the default Formik React context because of the high chance it has not been optimized. If it isn't optimized, it will trigger re-renders in every single component which uses Context to access Formik, and configuration is much less likely to be needed by users than Formik's API or state.

I'd be open to passing these values via a secondary Context which contains only Formik Configuration:

const Formik = () => {
  // formikApi is completely memoized
  // formikConfig is more volatile based on usage
  const [formik, config] = useFormik(...formikProps);

  return <FormikProvider value={formik}>
    <FormikConfigProvider value={config}>
      {/* children */}
    </FormikConfigProvider>
  </FormikProvider>
}

const useFormikConfig = () => useContext(FormikConfig.Consumer);

@jaredpalmer if this is something we want to do, I can make these changes to my v3 branch

[JoseLion]

I updated this branch just in case. Thanks again @johnrom for looking into this 🙂

[github-actions]

This pull request is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 60 days

[noisyscanner]

@github-actions plz no

[github-actions]

This pull request is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 60 days

[github-actions]

This pull request is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 60 days

[johnrom]

FYI this change is available in my v3 PR #3231

[github-actions]

This pull request is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 60 days

[JoseLion]

@johnrom I updated this branch just in case. However, it's great to know this is coming in v3, is there an ETA for v3 yet? 🙂