4 ms·
Not enforcing this can lead to a proliferation of inconsistently named constants Can you explain this further? Our team uses the ACTION, ACTION_SUCCESS, ACTION
by resu_nimda 11y ago
Not enforcing this can lead to a proliferation of inconsistently named constants
Can you explain this further? Our team uses the ACTION, ACTION_SUCCESS, ACTION_FAILURE pattern, and we haven't run into any issues. I like it because it's a bit easier to parse the sequence of actions in the console at a glance, and async actions are more clearly distinguished from synchronous ones. The main downside is having a bit more boilerplate.
- rbalicki 11y agoI think that's a good pattern, which is to say I think you're enforcing it correctly. I think that as a follow up, you might consider whether stores should respond to multiple ACTION's. You may find that all of the actions are forms of "take this item with id: X and replace it with this updated item" or an array of such commands