Adding control flow to JSX with TypeScript

13 June 2021

In any non-trivial React project, one of the things you’ll eventually need to do is render something conditionally. You can’t use if-else statements within JSX. You can use the conditional (“ternary”) operator but I often find that it produces code that’s hard to read. I’ve developed a transform which adds special meaning to certain JSX tags, allowing you to write <If> and <Else> blocks which behave intuitively.

JSX is a language extension for JavaScript developed by Facebook. In practice it’s used as an almost intrinsic part of React, though there’s no tight coupling between the two: you could use JSX without React and vice versa.

JSX is basically syntactic sugar which allows us to write more expressive code that’s closer to the HTML we’re looking to generate. Take these two examples:

const div = <div id="msg">Hello World!</div>;
const customComponent = <MyClock type="analogue" />;

These could be converted to:

const div = React.createElement("div", {id:"msg"}, "Hello World!");
const customComponent = React.createElement(MyClock, {type:"analogue"});

You could also use a different transpiler to produce some other output unrelated to React. The JSX specification states that JSX comes “without any defined semantics”. In simple terms, what that means is that a transpiler can decide what should be generated. It doesn’t need to be invocations of React functions and it doesn’t even necessarily need to be anything to do with generating HTML.

JSX mostly succeeds at its goal of making our code more expressive but, because the authors of the JSX spec decided - in my opinion, correctly - that it should be decoupled from React, they surrendered the ability to include any features which would specifically benefit React. In other words, by not defining any semantics, they couldn’t define any React-specific semantics.

Take this example which uses a conditional operator to decide which <div>s should be rendered1.

<div id="wrapper"> 
    { /* Not so bad: */ }
    { someCondition ? <div id="myDiv">Div text</div> : null }
    { /* Worse: */ }
    {
        (someValue === 4 && myStr.includes("search str") ? 
            <div id="anotherDiv"
                 className="myClass"
                 draggable
            >
                The condition was true
            </div> : 
            <div>The condition was false</div> 
    }
</div>

Maybe not everyone will agree but I find it very easy to miss the question mark and colon tokens with everything else that’s going on. The conditional operator wasn’t really designed to be used this way so it’s hardly surprising that it doesn’t hold up very well. The reason we’re limited to using the conditional operator (or the workarounds described here) is because of how JSX’s grammar is defined: in JavaScript if is a statement and JSX deals with expressions2.

I’ve seen a few attempts in various projects to try to handle this more gracefully. They usually end up looking something like this, where <If> is a custom component in which the render method evaluates the condition before returning either the children or null.

<If condition={Boolean(someObject)}>
    <MyComponent foo={getFoo()} bar={someObject.bar} />
</If>

I find this much more expressive than a conditional operator. The implementation isn’t difficult to write either, but it has one notable problem which is better understood by looking at the generated code:

React.createElement(If, { condition: Boolean(someObject) },
    React.createElement(MyComponent, {foo: getFoo(), bar: someObject.bar } })
)

Since all of the arguments to the first createElement invocation must be evaluated before entering the render method of <If>, both getFoo() and someObject.bar are evaluated as well. Calling getFoo() is unlikely to be too much of a problem unless it’s expensive but it’s still wasted effort. Accessing someObject.bar is worse, though. Since someObject may be falsy (i.e. undefined or null), trying to access bar will throw an error. The conditional operator short-circuits but our special component doesn’t.

How can we solve that? It’s as simple as changing our transformation. We need to make our transpiler aware of these additional semantics. We need to teach it to understand <If> blocks.

I presume that most tools used for transpiling JavaScript (e.g. Babel) are extensible enough to achieve this but I chose TypeScript. The TypeScript compiler can parse JSX natively and with a little prodding exposes a neat way of manipulating the AST.

Simply put, we can replace our usages of <If> at compile-time to use a conditional operator instead, as if by magic. After transformation, the previous example compiles to the following code. The difference is subtle but important.

Boolean(someObject) ?
    React.createElement(MyComponent, {foo: getFoo(), bar: someObject.bar } })
    : null

I also added support for <Else> conditions which I don’t think would be possible at all without a transformation. The <Else> block must immediately follow the closing </If>, excluding whitespace3.

<If condition={someCondition}>
    <div>The condition is true</div>
</If>
<Else>
    <div>The condition is false</div>
</Else>

By using transformation, we can achieve the expressiveness we want but without losing the desirable properties of short-circuiting.

The full code is available on GitHub. The transformation itself is only ~150 lines.


  1. The three attributes arranged vertically are done so for the sake of the example. In this specific case, it might be cleaner to place them all on one line. In reality, seeing 10 or more attributes is not uncommon so this vertical style is used a lot. ↩︎

  2. In other languages like Kotlin, if can act as an expression. This effectively removes the need for a conditional operator ↩︎

  3. This unfortunately means you can’t add a comment between the two blocks such as {/*Otherwise, do this*/}. I could whitelist that specific case but it doesn’t seem important and I’d rather keep the behaviour simple. ↩︎