Skip to content

typescript-cheatsheets/react

BranchesTags

Repository files navigation

React TypeScript Cheatsheet

Cheatsheet for using React with TypeScript.

react + ts logo

Web docs | Contribute! | Ask!

👋 This repo is maintained by @eps1lon and @filiptammergard. We're so happy you want to try out React with TypeScript! If you see anything wrong or missing, please file an issue! 👍

All Contributors | Discord

  • The Basic Cheatsheet is focused on helping React devs just start using TS in React apps
    • Focus on opinionated best practices, copy+pastable examples.
    • Explains some basic TS types usage and setup along the way.
    • Answers the most Frequently Asked Questions.
    • Does not cover generic type logic in detail. Instead we prefer to teach simple troubleshooting techniques for newbies.
    • The goal is to get effective with TS without learning too much TS.
  • The Advanced Cheatsheet helps show and explain advanced usage of generic types for people writing reusable type utilities/functions/render prop/higher order components and TS+React libraries.
    • It also has miscellaneous tips and tricks for pro users.
    • Advice for contributing to DefinitelyTyped.
    • The goal is to take full advantage of TypeScript.
  • The Migrating Cheatsheet helps collate advice for incrementally migrating large codebases from JS or Flow, from people who have done it.
    • We do not try to convince people to switch, only to help people who have already decided.
    • ⚠️This is a new cheatsheet, all assistance is welcome.
  • The HOC Cheatsheet specifically teaches people to write HOCs with examples.
    • Familiarity with Generics is necessary.
    • ⚠️This is the newest cheatsheet, all assistance is welcome.

Basic Cheatsheet

Basic Cheatsheet Table of Contents

Expand Table of Contents

Section 1: Setup

Prerequisites

You can use this cheatsheet for reference at any skill level, but basic understanding of React and TypeScript is assumed. Here is a list of prerequisites:

In the cheatsheet we assume you are using the latest versions of React and TypeScript.

React and TypeScript starter kits

React has documentation for how to start a new React project with some of the most popular frameworks. Here's how to start them with TypeScript:

  • Next.js: npx create-next-app@latest --ts
  • Remix: npx create-remix@latest
  • Gatsby: npm init gatsby --ts
  • Expo: npx create-expo-app -t with-typescript

Try React and TypeScript online

There are some tools that let you run React and TypeScript online, which can be helpful for debugging or making sharable reproductions.

Section 2: Getting Started

Function Components

These can be written as normal functions that take a props argument and return a JSX element.

{message}
; // You can choose to annotate the return type so an error is raised if you accidentally return some other type const App = ({ message }: AppProps): React.JSX.Element =>
{message}
; // You can also inline the type declaration; eliminates naming the prop types, but looks repetitive const App = ({ message }: { message: string }) =>
{message}
; // Alternatively, you can use `React.FunctionComponent` (or `React.FC`), if you prefer. // With latest React types and TypeScript 5.1. it's mostly a stylistic choice, otherwise discouraged. const App: React.FunctionComponent<{ message: string }> = ({ message }) => (
{message}
); // or const App: React.FC = ({ message }) =>
{message}
;">
// Declaring type of props - see "Typing Component Props" for more examples
type AppProps = {
  message: string;
}; /* use `interface` if exporting so that consumers can extend */

// Easiest way to declare a Function Component; return type is inferred.
const App = ({ message }: AppProps) => <div>{message}div>;

// You can choose to annotate the return type so an error is raised if you accidentally return some other type
const App = ({ message }: AppProps): React.JSX.Element => <div>{message}div>;

// You can also inline the type declaration; eliminates naming the prop types, but looks repetitive
const App = ({ message }: { message: string }) => <div>{message}div>;

// Alternatively, you can use `React.FunctionComponent` (or `React.FC`), if you prefer.
// With latest React types and TypeScript 5.1. it's mostly a stylistic choice, otherwise discouraged.
const App: React.FunctionComponent<{ message: string }> = ({ message }) => (
  <div>{message}div>
);
// or
const App: React.FC<AppProps> = ({ message }) => <div>{message}div>;

Tip: You might use Paul Shen's VS Code Extension to automate the type destructure declaration (incl a keyboard shortcut).

Why is React.FC not needed? What about React.FunctionComponent/React.VoidFunctionComponent?

You may see this in many React+TypeScript codebases:

const App: React.FunctionComponent<{ message: string }> = ({ message }) => (
  <div>{message}div>
);

However, the general consensus today is that React.FunctionComponent (or the shorthand React.FC) is not needed. If you're still using React 17 or TypeScript lower than 5.1, it is even discouraged. This is a nuanced opinion of course, but if you agree and want to remove React.FC from your codebase, you can use this jscodeshift codemod.

Some differences from the "normal function" version:

  • React.FunctionComponent is explicit about the return type, while the normal function version is implicit (or else needs additional annotation).

  • It provides typechecking and autocomplete for static properties like displayName, propTypes, and defaultProps.

    • Note that there are some known issues using defaultProps with React.FunctionComponent. See this issue for details. We maintain a separate defaultProps section you can also look up.

  • Before the React 18 type updates, React.FunctionComponent provided an implicit definition of children (see below), which was heavily debated and is one of the reasons React.FC was removed from the Create React App TypeScript template.

// before React 18 types
const Title: React.FunctionComponent<{ title: string }> = ({
  children,
  title,
}) => <div title={title}>{children}div>;
(Deprecated)Using React.VoidFunctionComponent or React.VFC instead

In @types/react 16.9.48, the React.VoidFunctionComponent or React.VFC type was added for typing children explicitly. However, please be aware that React.VFC and React.VoidFunctionComponent were deprecated in React 18 (DefinitelyTyped/DefinitelyTyped#59882), so this interim solution is no longer necessary or recommended in React 18+.

Please use regular function components or React.FC instead.

type Props = { foo: string };

// OK now, in future, error
const FunctionComponent: React.FunctionComponent<Props> = ({
  foo,
  children,
}: Props) => {
  return (
    <div>
      {foo} {children}
    </div>
  ); // OK
};

// Error now, in future, deprecated
const VoidFunctionComponent: React.VoidFunctionComponent<Props> = ({
  foo,
  children,
}) => {
  return (
    <div>
      {foo}
      {children}
    </div>
  );
};
  • In the future, it may automatically mark props as readonly, though that's a moot point if the props object is destructured in the parameter list.

In most cases it makes very little difference which syntax is used, but you may prefer the more explicit nature of React.FunctionComponent.

Hooks

Hooks are supported in @types/react from v16.8 up.

useState

Type inference works very well for simple values:

const [state, setState] = useState(false);
// `state` is inferred to be a boolean
// `setState` only takes booleans

See also the Using Inferred Types section if you need to use a complex type that you've relied on inference for.

However, many hooks are initialized with null-ish default values, and you may wonder how to provide types. Explicitly declare the type, and use a union type:

const [user, setUser] = useState<User | null>(null);

// later...
setUser(newUser);

You can also use type assertions if a state is initialized soon after setup and always has a value after:

const [user, setUser] = useState<User>({} as User);

// later...
setUser(newUser);

This temporarily "lies" to the TypeScript compiler that {} is of type User. You should follow up by setting the user state — if you don't, the rest of your code may rely on the fact that user is of type User and that may lead to runtime errors.

useCallback

You can type the useCallback just like any other function.

const memoizedCallback = useCallback(
  (param1: string, param2: number) => {
    console.log(param1, param2)
    return { ok: true }
  },
  [...],
);
/**
 * VSCode will show the following type:
 * const memoizedCallback:
 *  (param1: string, param2: number) => { ok: boolean }
 */

Note that for React < 18, the function signature of useCallback typed arguments as any[] by default:

function useCallback<T extends (...args: any[]) => any>(
  callback: T,
  deps: DependencyList
): T;

In React >= 18, the function signature of useCallback changed to the following:

function useCallback<T extends Function>(callback: T, deps: DependencyList): T;

Therefore, the following code will yield "Parameter 'e' implicitly has an 'any' type." error in React >= 18, but not <17.

// @ts-expect-error Parameter 'e' implicitly has 'any' type.
useCallback((e) => {}, []);
// Explicit 'any' type.
useCallback((e: any) => {}, []);

useReducer

You can use Discriminated Unions for reducer actions. Don't forget to define the return type of reducer, otherwise TypeScript will infer it.

import { useReducer } from "react";

const initialState = { count: 0 };

type ACTIONTYPE =
  | { type: "increment"; payload: number }
  | { type: "decrement"; payload: string };

function reducer(state: typeof initialState, action: ACTIONTYPE) {
  switch (action.type) {
    case "increment":
      return { count: state.count + action.payload };
    case "decrement":
      return { count: state.count - Number(action.payload) };
    default:
      throw new Error();
  }
}

function Counter() {
  const [state, dispatch] = useReducer(reducer, initialState);
  return (
    <>
      Count: {state.count}
      <button onClick={() => dispatch({ type: "decrement", payload: "5" })}>
        -
      button>
      <button onClick={() => dispatch({ type: "increment", payload: 5 })}>
        +
      button>
    >
  );
}

View in the TypeScript Playground

Usage with Reducer from redux

In case you use the redux library to write reducer function, It provides a convenient helper of the format Reducer which takes care of the return type for you.

So the above reducer example becomes:

import { Reducer } from 'redux';

export function reducer: Reducer<AppState, Action>() {}

useEffect / useLayoutEffect

Both of useEffect and useLayoutEffect are used for performing side effects and return an optional cleanup function which means if they don't deal with returning values, no types are necessary. When using useEffect, take care not to return anything other than a function or undefined, otherwise both TypeScript and React will yell at you. This can be subtle when using arrow functions:

function DelayedEffect(props: { timerMs: number }) {
  const { timerMs } = props;

  useEffect(
    () =>
      setTimeout(() => {
        /* do stuff */
      }, timerMs),
    [timerMs]
  );
  // bad example! setTimeout implicitly returns a number
  // because the arrow function body isn't wrapped in curly braces
  return null;
}
Solution to the above example 
function DelayedEffect(props: { timerMs: number }) {
  const { timerMs } = props;

  useEffect(() => {
    setTimeout(() => {
      /* do stuff */
    }, timerMs);
  }, [timerMs]);
  // better; use the void keyword to make sure you return undefined
  return null;
}

useRef

In TypeScript, useRef returns a reference that is either read-only or mutable, depends on whether your type argument fully covers the initial value or not. Choose one that suits your use case.

Option 1: DOM element ref

To access a DOM element: provide only the element type as argument, and use null as initial value. In this case, the returned reference will have a read-only .current that is managed by React. TypeScript expects you to give this ref to an element's ref prop:

function Foo() {
  // - If possible, prefer as specific as possible. For example, HTMLDivElement
  //   is better than HTMLElement and way better than Element.
  // - Technical-wise, this returns RefObject
  const divRef = useRef<HTMLDivElement>(null);

  useEffect(() => {
    // Note that ref.current may be null. This is expected, because you may
    // conditionally render the ref-ed element, or you may forget to assign it
    if (!divRef.current) throw Error("divRef is not assigned");

    // Now divRef.current is sure to be HTMLDivElement
    doSomethingWith(divRef.current);
  });

  // Give the ref to an element so React can manage it for you
  return <div ref={divRef}>etcdiv>;
}

If you are sure that divRef.current will never be null, it is also possible to use the non-null assertion operator !:

const divRef = useRef<HTMLDivElement>(null!);
// Later... No need to check if it is null
doSomethingWith(divRef.current);

Note that you are opting out of type safety here - you will have a runtime error if you forget to assign the ref to an element in the render, or if the ref-ed element is conditionally rendered.

Tip: Choosing which HTMLElement to use

Refs demand specificity - it is not enough to just specify any old HTMLElement. If you don't know the name of the element type you need, you can check lib.dom.ts or make an intentional type error and let the language service tell you:

image

Option 2: Mutable value ref

To have a mutable value: provide the type you want, and make sure the initial value fully belongs to that type:

Cancel timer; }">
function Foo() {
  // Technical-wise, this returns MutableRefObject
  const intervalRef = useRef<number | null>(null);

  // You manage the ref yourself (that's why it's called MutableRefObject!)
  useEffect(() => {
    intervalRef.current = setInterval(...);
    return () => clearInterval(intervalRef.current);
  }, []);

  // The ref is not passed to any element's "ref" prop
  return <button onClick={/* clearInterval the ref */}>Cancel timerbutton>;
}
See also

useImperativeHandle

Based on this Stackoverflow answer:

// Countdown.tsx

// Define the handle types which will be passed to the forwardRef
export type CountdownHandle = {
  start: () => void;
};

type CountdownProps = {};

const Countdown = forwardRef<CountdownHandle, CountdownProps>((props, ref) => {
  useImperativeHandle(ref, () => ({
    // start() has type inference here
    start() {
      alert("Start");
    },
  }));

  return <div>Countdowndiv>;
});
// The component uses the Countdown component

import Countdown, { CountdownHandle } from "./Countdown.tsx";

function App() {
  const countdownEl = useRef<CountdownHandle>(null);

  useEffect(() => {
    if (countdownEl.current) {
      // start() has type inference here as well
      countdownEl.current.start();
    }
  }, []);

  return <Countdown ref={countdownEl} />;
}
See also:

Custom Hooks

If you are returning an array in your Custom Hook, you will want to avoid type inference as TypeScript will infer a union type (when you actually want different types in each position of the array). Instead, use TS 3.4 const assertions:

import { useState } from "react";

export function useLoading() {
  const [isLoading, setState] = useState(false);
  const load = (aPromise: Promise<any>) => {
    setState(true);
    return aPromise.finally(() => setState(false));
  };
  return [isLoading, load] as const; // infers [boolean, typeof load] instead of (boolean | typeof load)[]
}

View in the TypeScript Playground

This way, when you destructure you actually get the right types based on destructure position.

Alternative: Asserting a tuple return type

If you are having trouble with const assertions, you can also assert or define the function return types:

import { useState } from "react";

export function useLoading() {
  const [isLoading, setState] = useState(false);
  const load = (aPromise: Promise<any>) => {
    setState(true);
    return aPromise.finally(() => setState(false));
  };
  return [isLoading, load] as [
    boolean,
    (aPromise: Promise<any>) => Promise<any>
  ];
}

A helper function that automatically types tuples can also be helpful if you write a lot of custom hooks:

function tuplify<T extends any[]>(...elements: T) {
  return elements;
}

function useArray() {
  const numberValue = useRef(3).current;
  const functionValue = useRef(() => {}).current;
  return [numberValue, functionValue]; // type is (number | (() => void))[]
}

function useTuple() {
  const numberValue = useRef(3).current;
  const functionValue = useRef(() => {}).current;
  return tuplify(numberValue, functionValue); // type is [number, () => void]
}

Note that the React team recommends that custom hooks that return more than two values should use proper objects instead of tuples, however.

More Hooks + TypeScript reading:

If you are writing a React Hooks library, don't forget that you should also expose your types for users to use.

Example React Hooks + TypeScript Libraries:

Something to add? File an issue.

Class Components

Within TypeScript, React.Component is a generic type (aka React.Component), so you want to provide it with (optional) prop and state type parameters:

type MyProps = {
  // using `interface` is also ok
  message: string;
};
type MyState = {
  count: number; // like this
};
class App extends React.Component<MyProps, MyState> {
  state: MyState = {
    // optional second annotation for better type inference
    count: 0,
  };
  render() {
    return (
      <div>
        {this.props.message} {this.state.count}
      div>
    );
  }
}

View in the TypeScript Playground

Don't forget that you can export/import/extend these types/interfaces for reuse.

Why annotate state twice?

It isn't strictly necessary to annotate the state class property, but it allows better type inference when accessing this.state and also initializing the state.

This is because they work in two different ways, the 2nd generic type parameter will allow this.setState() to work correctly, because that method comes from the base class, but initializing state inside the component overrides the base implementation so you have to make sure that you tell the compiler that you're not actually doing anything different.

See commentary by @ferdaber here.

No need for readonly

You often see sample code include readonly to mark props and state immutable:

type MyProps = {
  readonly message: string;
};
type MyState = {
  readonly count: number;
};

This is not necessary as React.Component already marks them as immutable. (See PR and discussion!)

Class Methods: Do it like normal, but just remember any arguments for your functions also need to be typed:

class App extends React.Component<{ message: string }, { count: number }> {
  state = { count: 0 };
  render() {
    return (
      <div onClick={() => this.increment(1)}>
        {this.props.message} {this.state.count}
      div>
    );
  }
  increment = (amt: number) => {
    // like this
    this.setState((state) => ({
      count: state.count + amt,
    }));
  };
}

View in the TypeScript Playground

Class Properties: If you need to declare class properties for later use, just declare it like state, but without assignment:

class App extends React.Component<{
  message: string;
}> {
  pointer: number; // like this
  componentDidMount() {
    this.pointer = 3;
  }
  render() {
    return (
      <div>
        {this.props.message} and {this.pointer}
      div>
    );
  }
}

View in the TypeScript Playground

Something to add? File an issue.

Typing getDerivedStateFromProps

Before you start using getDerivedStateFromProps, please go through the documentation and You Probably Don't Need Derived State. Derived State can be implemented using hooks which can also help set up memoization.

Here are a few ways in which you can annotate getDerivedStateFromProps

  1. If you have explicitly typed your derived state and want to make sure that the return value from getDerivedStateFromProps conforms to it.
class Comp extends React.Component<Props, State> {
  static getDerivedStateFromProps(
    props: Props,
    state: State
  ): Partial<State> | null {
    //
  }
}
  1. When you want the function's return value to determine your state.
class Comp extends React.Component<
  Props,
  ReturnType<typeof Comp["getDerivedStateFromProps"]>
> {
  static getDerivedStateFromProps(props: Props) {}
}
  1. When you want derived state with other state fields and memoization
type CustomValue = any;
interface Props {
  propA: CustomValue;
}
interface DefinedState {
  otherStateField: string;
}
type State = DefinedState & ReturnType<typeof transformPropsToState>;
function transformPropsToState(props: Props) {
  return {
    savedPropA: props.propA, // save for memoization
    derivedState: props.propA,
  };
}
class Comp extends React.PureComponent<Props, State> {
  constructor(props: Props) {
    super(props);
    this.state = {
      otherStateField: "123",
      ...transformPropsToState(props),
    };
  }
  static getDerivedStateFromProps(props: Props, state: State) {
    if (isEqual(props.propA, state.savedPropA)) return null;
    return transformPropsToState(props);
  }
}

View in the TypeScript Playground

You May Not Need defaultProps

As per this tweet, defaultProps will eventually be deprecated. You can check the discussions here:

The consensus is to use object default values.

Function Components:

type GreetProps = { age?: number };

const Greet = ({ age = 21 }: GreetProps) => // etc

Class Components:

type GreetProps = {
  age?: number;
};

class Greet extends React.Component<GreetProps> {
  render() {
    const { age = 21 } = this.props;
    /*...*/
  }
}

let el = <Greet age={3} />;

Typing defaultProps

Type inference improved greatly for defaultProps in TypeScript 3.0+, although some edge cases are still problematic.

Function Components

// using typeof as a shortcut; note that it hoists!
// you can also declare the type of DefaultProps if you choose
// e.g. https://github.com/typescript-cheatsheets/react/issues/415#issuecomment-841223219
type GreetProps = { age: number } & typeof defaultProps;

const defaultProps = {
  age: 21,
};

const Greet = (props: GreetProps) => {
  // etc
};
Greet.defaultProps = defaultProps;

See this in TS Playground

For Class components, there are a couple ways to do it (including using the Pick utility type) but the recommendation is to "reverse" the props definition:

type GreetProps = typeof Greet.defaultProps & {
  age: number;
};

class Greet extends React.Component<GreetProps> {
  static defaultProps = {
    age: 21,
  };
  /*...*/
}

// Type-checks! No type assertions needed!
let el = <Greet age={3} />;
React.JSX.LibraryManagedAttributes nuance for library authors

The above implementations work fine for App creators, but sometimes you want to be able to export GreetProps so that others can consume it. The problem here is that the way GreetProps is defined, age is a required prop when it isn't because of defaultProps.

The insight to have here is that GreetProps is the internal contract for your component, not the external, consumer facing contract. You could create a separate type specifically for export, or you could make use of the React.JSX.LibraryManagedAttributes utility:

// internal contract, should not be exported out
type GreetProps = {
  age: number;
};

class Greet extends Component<GreetProps> {
  static defaultProps = { age: 21 };
}

// external contract
export type ApparentGreetProps = React.JSX.LibraryManagedAttributes<
  typeof Greet,
  GreetProps
>;

This will work properly, although hovering overApparentGreetPropsmay be a little intimidating. You can reduce this boilerplate with theComponentProps utility detailed below.

Consuming Props of a Component with defaultProps

A component with defaultProps may seem to have some required props that actually aren't.

Problem Statement

Here's what you want to do:

;">
interface IProps {
  name: string;
}
const defaultProps = {
  age: 25,
};
const GreetComponent = ({ name, age }: IProps & typeof defaultProps) => (
  <div>{`Hello, my name is ${name}, ${age}`}div>
);
GreetComponent.defaultProps = defaultProps;

const TestComponent = (props: React.ComponentProps<typeof GreetComponent>) => {
  return <h1 />;
};

// Property 'age' is missing in type '{ name: string; }' but required in type '{ age: number; }'
const el = <TestComponent name="foo" />;
Solution

Define a utility that applies React.JSX.LibraryManagedAttributes:

type ComponentProps<T> = T extends
  | React.ComponentType<infer P>
  | React.Component<infer P>
  ? React.JSX.LibraryManagedAttributes<T, P>
  : never;

const TestComponent = (props: ComponentProps<typeof GreetComponent>) => {
  return <h1 />;
};

// No error
const el = <TestComponent name="foo" />;

See this in TS Playground

Misc Discussions and Knowledge

Why does React.FC break defaultProps?

You can check the discussions here:

This is just the current state and may be fixed in future.

TypeScript 2.9 and earlier

For TypeScript 2.9 and earlier, there's more than one way to do it, but this is the best advice we've yet seen:

type Props = Required<typeof MyComponent.defaultProps> & {
  /* additional props here */
};

export class MyComponent extends React.Component<Props> {
  static defaultProps = {
    foo: "foo",
  };
}

Our former recommendation used the Partial type feature in TypeScript, which means that the current interface will fulfill a partial version on the wrapped interface. In that way we can extend defaultProps without any changes in the types!

interface IMyComponentProps {
  firstProp?: string;
  secondProp: IPerson[];
}

export class MyComponent extends React.Component<IMyComponentProps> {
  public static defaultProps: Partial<IMyComponentProps> = {
    firstProp: "default",
  };
}

The problem with this approach is it causes complex issues with the type inference working with React.JSX.LibraryManagedAttributes. Basically it causes the compiler to think that when creating a JSX expression with that component, that all of its props are optional.

See commentary by @ferdaber here and here.

Something to add? File an issue.

Typing Component Props

This is intended as a basic orientation and reference for React developers familiarizing with TypeScript.

Basic Prop Types Examples

A list of TypeScript types you will likely use in a React+TypeScript app:

`) */ obj3: {}; /** a dict object with any number of properties of the same type */ dict1: { [key: string]: MyTypeHere; }; dict2: Record; // equivalent to dict1 /** function that doesn't take or return anything (VERY COMMON) */ onClick: () => void; /** function with named prop (VERY COMMON) */ onChange: (id: number) => void; /** function type syntax that takes an event (VERY COMMON) */ onChange: (event: React.ChangeEvent) => void; /** alternative function type syntax that takes an event (VERY COMMON) */ onClick(event: React.MouseEvent): void; /** any function as long as you don't invoke it (not recommended) */ onSomething: Function; /** an optional prop (VERY COMMON!) */ optional?: OptionalType; /** when passing down the state setter function returned by `useState` to a child component. `number` is an example, swap out with whatever the type of your state */ setState: React.Dispatch>; };">
type AppProps = {
  message: string;
  count: number;
  disabled: boolean;
  /** array of a type! */
  names: string[];
  /** string literals to specify exact string values, with a union type to join them together */
  status: "waiting" | "success";
  /** an object with known properties (but could have more at runtime) */
  obj: {
    id: string;
    title: string;
  };
  /** array of objects! (common) */
  objArr: {
    id: string;
    title: string;
  }[];
  /** any non-primitive value - can't access any properties (NOT COMMON but useful as placeholder) */
  obj2: object;
  /** an interface with no required properties - (NOT COMMON, except for things like `React.Component<{}, State>`) */
  obj3: {};
  /** a dict object with any number of properties of the same type */
  dict1: {
    [key: string]: MyTypeHere;
  };
  dict2: Record<string, MyTypeHere>; // equivalent to dict1
  /** function that doesn't take or return anything (VERY COMMON) */
  onClick: () => void;
  /** function with named prop (VERY COMMON) */
  onChange: (id: number) => void;
  /** function type syntax that takes an event (VERY COMMON) */
  onChange: (event: React.ChangeEvent<HTMLInputElement>) => void;
  /** alternative function type syntax that takes an event (VERY COMMON) */
  onClick(event: React.MouseEvent<HTMLButtonElement>): void;
  /** any function as long as you don't invoke it (not recommended) */
  onSomething: Function;
  /** an optional prop (VERY COMMON!) */
  optional?: OptionalType;
  /** when passing down the state setter function returned by `useState` to a child component. `number` is an example, swap out with whatever the type of your state */
  setState: React.Dispatch<React.SetStateAction<number>>;
};
object as the non-primitive type

object is a common source of misunderstanding in TypeScript. It does not mean "any object" but rather "any non-primitive type", which means it represents anything that is not number, bigint, string, boolean, symbol, null or undefined.

Typing "any non-primitive value" is most likely not something that you should do much in React, which means you will probably not use object much.

Empty interface, {} and Object

An empty interface, {} and Object all represent "any non-nullish value"—not "an empty object" as you might think. Using these types is a common source of misunderstanding and is not recommended.

interface AnyNonNullishValue {} // equivalent to `type AnyNonNullishValue = {}` or `type AnyNonNullishValue = Object`

let value: AnyNonNullishValue;

// these are all fine, but might not be expected
value = 1;
value = "foo";
value = () => alert("foo");
value = {};
value = { foo: "bar" };

// these are errors
value = undefined;
value = null;

Useful React Prop Type Examples

Relevant for components that accept other React components as props.

export declare interface AppProps {
  children?: React.ReactNode; // best, accepts everything React can render
  childrenElement: React.JSX.Element; // A single React element
  style?: React.CSSProperties; // to pass through style props
  onChange?: React.FormEventHandler<HTMLInputElement>; // form events! the generic parameter is the type of event.target
  //  more info: https://react-typescript-cheatsheet.netlify.app/docs/advanced/patterns_by_usecase/#wrappingmirroring
  props: Props & React.ComponentPropsWithoutRef<"button">; // to impersonate all the props of a button element and explicitly not forwarding its ref
  props2: Props & React.ComponentPropsWithRef<MyButtonWithForwardRef>; // to impersonate all the props of MyButtonForwardedRef and explicitly forwarding its ref
}
Small React.ReactNode edge case before React 18

Before the React 18 type updates, this code typechecked but had a runtime error:

{{}}; }">
type Props = {
  children?: React.ReactNode;
};

function Comp({ children }: Props) {
  return <div>{children}div>;
}
function App() {
  // Before React 18: Runtime error "Objects are not valid as a React child"
  // After React 18: Typecheck error "Type '{}' is not assignable to type 'ReactNode'"
  return <Comp>{{}}Comp>;
}

This is because ReactNode includes ReactFragment which allowed type {} before React 18.

Thanks @pomle for raising this.

React.JSX.Element vs React.ReactNode?

Quote @ferdaber: A more technical explanation is that a valid React node is not the same thing as what is returned by React.createElement. Regardless of what a component ends up rendering, React.createElement always returns an object, which is the React.JSX.Element interface, but React.ReactNode is the set of all possible return values of a component.

  • React.JSX.Element -> Return value of React.createElement
  • React.ReactNode -> Return value of a component

More discussion: Where ReactNode does not overlap with React.JSX.Element

Something to add? File an issue.

Types or Interfaces?

You can use either Types or Interfaces to type Props and State, so naturally the question arises - which do you use?

TL;DR

Use Interface until You Need Type - orta.

More Advice

Here's a helpful rule of thumb:

  • always use interface for public API's definition when authoring a library or 3rd party ambient type definitions, as this allows a consumer to extend them via declaration merging if some definitions are missing.

  • consider using type for your React Component Props and State, for consistency and because it is more constrained.

You can read more about the reasoning behind this rule of thumb in Interface vs Type alias in TypeScript 2.7.

The TypeScript Handbook now also includes guidance on Differences Between Type Aliases and Interfaces.

Note: At scale, there are performance reasons to prefer interfaces (see official Microsoft notes on this) but take this with a grain of salt

Types are useful for union types (e.g. type MyType = TypeA | TypeB) whereas Interfaces are better for declaring dictionary shapes and then implementing or extending them.

Useful table for Types vs Interfaces

It's a nuanced topic, don't get too hung up on it. Here's a handy table:

Aspect Type Interface
Can describe functions ✅ ✅
Can describe constructors ✅ ✅
Can describe tuples ✅ ✅
Interfaces can extend it ⚠️ ✅
Classes can extend it 🚫 ✅
Classes can implement it (implements) ⚠️ ✅
Can intersect another one of its kind ✅ ⚠️
Can create a union with another one of its kind ✅ 🚫
Can be used to create mapped types ✅ 🚫
Can be mapped over with mapped types ✅ ✅
Expands in error messages and logs ✅ 🚫
Can be augmented 🚫 ✅
Can be recursive ⚠️ ✅

⚠️ In some cases

(source: Karol Majewski)

Something to add? File an issue.

getDerivedStateFromProps

Before you start using getDerivedStateFromProps, please go through the documentation and You Probably Don't Need Derived State. Derived State can be easily achieved using hooks which can also help set up memoization easily.

Here are a few ways in which you can annotate getDerivedStateFromProps

  1. If you have explicitly typed your derived state and want to make sure that the return value from getDerivedStateFromProps conforms to it.
class Comp extends React.Component<Props, State> {
  static getDerivedStateFromProps(
    props: Props,
    state: State
  ): Partial<State> | null {
    //
  }
}
  1. When you want the function's return value to determine your state.
class Comp extends React.Component<
  Props,
  ReturnType<typeof Comp["getDerivedStateFromProps"]>
> {
  static getDerivedStateFromProps(props: Props) {}
}
  1. When you want derived state with other state fields and memoization
type CustomValue = any;
interface Props {
  propA: CustomValue;
}
interface DefinedState {
  otherStateField: string;
}
type State = DefinedState & ReturnType<typeof transformPropsToState>;
function transformPropsToState(props: Props) {
  return {
    savedPropA: props.propA, // save for memoization
    derivedState: props.propA,
  };
}
class Comp extends React.PureComponent<Props, State> {
  constructor(props: Props) {
    super(props);
    this.state = {
      otherStateField: "123",
      ...transformPropsToState(props),
    };
  }
  static getDerivedStateFromProps(props: Props, state: State) {
    if (isEqual(props.propA, state.savedPropA)) return null;
    return transformPropsToState(props);
  }
}

View in the TypeScript Playground

Forms and Events

If performance is not an issue (and it usually isn't!), inlining handlers is easiest as you can just use type inference and contextual typing:

const el = (
  <button
    onClick={(event) => {
      /* event will be correctly typed automatically! */
    }}
  />
);

But if you need to define your event handler separately, IDE tooling really comes in handy here, as the @type definitions come with a wealth of typing. Type what you are looking for and usually the autocomplete will help you out. Here is what it looks like for an onChange for a form event:

type State = {
  text: string;
};
class App extends React.Component<Props, State> {
  state = {
    text: "",
  };

  // typing on RIGHT hand side of =
  onChange = (e: React.FormEvent<HTMLInputElement>): void => {
    this.setState({ text: e.currentTarget.value });
  };
  render() {
    return (
      <div>
        <input type="text" value={this.state.text} onChange={this.onChange} />
      div>
    );
  }
}

View in the TypeScript Playground

Instead of typing the arguments and return values with React.FormEvent<> and void, you may alternatively apply types to the event handler itself (contributed by @TomasHubelbauer):

  // typing on LEFT hand side of =
  onChange: React.ChangeEventHandler<HTMLInputElement> = (e) => {
    this.setState({text: e.currentTarget.value})
  }
Why two ways to do the same thing?

The first method uses an inferred method signature (e: React.FormEvent): void and the second method enforces a type of the delegate provided by @types/react. So React.ChangeEventHandler<> is simply a "blessed" typing by @types/react, whereas you can think of the inferred method as more... artisanally hand-rolled. Either way it's a good pattern to know. See our Github PR for more.

Typing onSubmit, with Uncontrolled components in a Form

If you don't quite care about the type of the event, you can just use React.SyntheticEvent. If your target form has custom named inputs that you'd like to access, you can use a type assertion:

<form
  ref={formRef}
  onSubmit={(e: React.SyntheticEvent) => {
    e.preventDefault();
    const target = e.target as typeof e.target & {
      email: { value: string };
      password: { value: string };
    };
    const email = target.email.value; // typechecks!
    const password = target.password.value; // typechecks!
    // etc...
  }}
>
  <div>
    <label>
      Email:
      <input type="email" name="email" />
    label>
  div>
  <div>
    <label>
      Password:
      <input type="password" name="password" />
    label>
  div>
  <div>
    <input type="submit" value="Log in" />
  div>
form>

View in the TypeScript Playground

Of course, if you're making any sort of significant form, you should use Formik or React Hook Form, which are written in TypeScript.

List of event types
Event Type Description
AnimationEvent CSS Animations.
ChangeEvent Changing the value of ,