Optional thunk identifier

[braska]

Resolves #20

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #24 into master will not change coverage. The diff coverage is 100%.

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##           master    #24   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage     100%   100%           
=====================================
  Files           4      4           
  Lines          80    112   +32     
  Branches       25     39   +14     
=====================================
+ Hits           80    112   +32

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/utils.js	100% <100%> (ø)	:arrow_up:
src/selectors.js	100% <100%> (ø)	:arrow_up:
src/middleware.js	100% <100%> (ø)	:arrow_up:
src/reducer.js	100% <100%> (ø)	:arrow_up:

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data Powered by Codecov. Last update e250bb0...cbe3b94. Read the comment docs.

[diegohaz]

What an amazing job, @braska. Thank you.

I'll take a time this weekend to look at the code.

[braska]

I am worried only about one thing: in original version meta.thunk become string after passing middleware (e.g.: FOO_1234567891234567_REQUEST), but now middleware puts object to this field ({ name: 'FOO', key: '1234567891234567', type: 'REQUEST' }). I hope that the users of this package don't interact with the string in meta.thunk.

[diegohaz]

I hope that the users of this package don't interact with the string in meta.thunk.

They are not supposed to. However, I'm gonna release it as v0.7.0, just in case.

One question: what are the API for defining the thunk id? Are these two snippets valid?

const action = {
  type: 'MY_ACTION',
  payload: { id: 'foo' },
  meta: { thunk: 'foo' },
}

const action = {
  type: 'MY_ACTION',
  payload: { id: 'foo' },
  meta: { thunk: { id: 'foo' } },
}

[braska]

Only second action is valid. I was thinking about the first option, but realized that payload.id not always acceptable for using as thunk identifier.

[diegohaz]

Okay, let's merge it. We can improve it later if needed. Thank you very much, @braska.

Since you've played a lot with the code, do you want to become a collaborator on this project?

[braska]

It sounds very cool! I can't promise that I will always have time to do something in this repo, but I'm ready to help if possible.

[diegohaz]

Awesome. Don't worry. It's just so you have more permissions in the case you need to.