Syntax discussion about entity-state HOT 10 CLOSED

this.store.dispatch(new UpdateActive(TodoState, { done: true }));

I think that if we start with this then we can always add other convenient ways to express it later.
I would avoid adding anything other than selectors to the EntityState static members for now.
Once something is added it is difficult to take it back ;-)

from entity-state.

I like the first with lowercase.

from entity-state.

I also prefer the first option (with lowercase if it is an action creator).
The second option would make things bit confusing between selectors and actions in the exposed static interface.

First prize though would be of defining actions using new. Something like this:

this.store.dispatch(new UpdateActive(TodoState, { done: true }));

This action could be defined something like this:

export class UpdateActive<T>{
  constructor(private target: Type<EntityState<T>>, public payload: Updater<T>) {
    return <any> generateActionObject('updateActive', target, payload); 
    // This return tricks the constructor into returning something else ;-)
  }
}

from entity-state.

@markwhitfeld

seems logical

this.store.dispatch(new TodoState.updateActive({ done: true }));

from entity-state.

Well, thats .. interesting. If something like this is actually possible I could also create those as static classes on the EntityState so something like new TodoState.UpdateActive({ done: true }) could be possible with full type information. (Same issue as 2. that I can't get the type information from static context.)

While making the constructor returns something else makes me feel uncomfortable I think this is the best approach.

from entity-state.

If it makes you feel less uncomfortable then you could view it as just a mechanism to create a public API to your dynamic action generator 👍 😉

from entity-state.

Github needs a fire reaction. 🔥 😆

I liked this comment #2 (comment) proposal, it seems to join all the ideas in one. Maybe it needs some work to be more friendly, but I like it.

from entity-state.

@odahcam What do you propose to make it more friendly? Or what do you consider unfriendly?
Every approach that looks somewhat nicer is in a static context and loses all type information.

We could go so far and use a proxy and write something like this.store.dispatch(new RemoveActive in TodoState.API) or even without new 😅 This might also have type info actually.

from entity-state.

That's actually very interesting hehe, but I don't have any other suggestion I would like stand for at the moment, I'm already good with what we have. With experience we'll know what to improve.

from entity-state.

Closing this as the syntax is set for now.

from entity-state.