Proposal: make exported store name insignificant about redux HOT 7 CLOSED

Sounds like a good solution!

from redux.

Looks good for me too. I like the ideia of passing the store to get it's state. Passing a string to do that is something that I dislike in e.g. Flummox.

ES6 Map api is simple enough too.

👍

from redux.

Maybe shouldn't even pass an ES6 Map and instead pass just the read function. This reinforces that the state is meant to be read-only, doesn't introduce a dependency on a specific type and also forbids weird things like enumeration.

export function incrementIfOdd() {
  return (dispatch, read) => {
    if (read(counterStore) % 2 === 0) {
      return;
    }

    dispatch(increment());
  };
}

from redux.

👍

from redux.

If somebody wants to PR this, I'll take it.

from redux.

If you do decide to PR this, note that internally we still need to use string keys for storage. This is because functions are hot-swapped on every file save, and their identities change. This is why we have an { key: string -> state: object } object for state, and a { store: function -> key: string } ES6 Map for mapping Store functions to state keys.

from redux.

Fixed via ac1be83, thanks!

from redux.