Bikeshedding thread here.
As part of 1.0 we can do some breaking changes we won't be able to do after 1.0. This includes bikeshedding on names.
I wanted this library to be a functional programming trojan horse for Flux people, which I think it succeeded at. Before we reach 1.0, we are able to drop some of the Flux naming baggage and find better names for whatever it does.
We're already getting rid of dispatcher and renaming stores to reducers. Do getState and dispatch still make sense?
Traditionally dispatch was called this way because in Flux an action really is dispatched across multiple Stores. In Redux, however, functional composition means that there is only one root reducer at the top. Do we really dispatch?
I've also heard some people are confused by getState as it sounds similar to React's setState and seems to imply some connection to React. In fact, Redux has nothing to do with React.
What if instead of { getState, dispatch, subscribe } we had... { read, perform, subscribe }?
Let's bikeshed.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4