Closed craigp-atw closed 3 months ago
Latest commit: |
2078b61
|
Status: | ✅ Deploy successful! |
Preview URL: | https://a01466b4.tabitha-editor.pages.dev |
Branch Preview URL: | https://move-tokenization-to-server.tabitha-editor.pages.dev |
after further thought and a little research, I guess the trade-off on the async pipe
is to either have two separate calls or a condition inside the one that will determine whether it received a Promise
or not. If you don't foresee a situation where the sequence of an async call and sync call don't conflict, then this solution will work but putting the condition inside pipe
will help avoid such a conflict should it arise in the future.
after further thought and a little research, I guess the trade-off on the
async pipe
is to either have two separate calls or a condition inside the one that will determine whether it received aPromise
or not. If you don't foresee a situation where the sequence of an async call and sync call don't conflict, then this solution will work but putting the condition insidepipe
will help avoid such a conflict should it arise in the future.
I had tried only using the async pipe, but it caused a function in case_frame to fail (see below), because it returned a Promise instead of the expected value. I could have changed check_case_frames()
to become async
, but that would have an unnecessary ripple effect throughout the whole rule system.
Moved tokenize and checking process to the server-side. Converted to an API call that returns an array/structure of tokens.
Added 'Check' button to prevent constant API requests.