status-im/re-frame
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/status-im/re-frame.git synced 2025-02-23 15:28:09 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

fix typos in debugging-event-handlers.md;

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Matthew Jaoudi 2016-12-17 01:09:30 -08:00
parent 2b7d2c0754
commit bc6ade40d5
1 changed files with 5 additions and 4 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

9
docs/Debugging-Event-Handlers.md
View File

@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
This page describes techniques for debugging re-frame's event handlers.
Event handlers are quite central to a re-frame app. Only event handlers
can update `app-db`, to "step" an application "forward" from one state
can update `app-db` to "step" an application "forward" from one state
to the next.
<!-- START doctoc generated TOC please keep comment here to allow auto update -->
@ -79,7 +79,7 @@ business on every single handler? That would be very repetitive.
Yes, you will have to put it on each handler. And, yes, that could be repetitive, unless
you take some steps.
One thing you an do is to define standard interceptors the top of the `event.cljs` namespace:
One thing you can do is to define standard interceptors at the top of the `event.cljs` namespace:
```clj
(def standard-interceptors [(when ^boolean goog.DEBUG debug) another-interceptor])
```
@ -210,7 +210,7 @@ That's handlers which take `db` and `event` arguments, and return a new `db`.
So, they MUST return a new `db` value - which should be validated.
But what if we tried to do the same for `-fx` handlers, which return instead
an `effects` map which may, or may not, contain an `:db`? Our solution would
an `effects` map which may, or may not, contain a `:db`? Our solution would
have to allow for the absence of a new `db` value (by doing no validity check, because nothing
was being changed).
@ -227,4 +227,5 @@ was being changed).
handler-fn)))
```
Actually, it would probably be better to write an alternative `after` which
Actually, it would probably be better to write an alternative `after` which XXX
TODO: finish thought