thunks | magical composer for all JavaScript | Reactive Programming library

For some reason my Login component is not redirecting a successful login to the right page. I am using a Spring boot backend with a React frontend and am pretty sure I can do this with react on the frontend by using history.push('/profile') to allow a successful login to be redirected to the /profile page but for some reason it stays on /login even after successfully logging in. Any ideas what I am doing wrong? Thank you!

Login.jsx:

I am trying to implement a logout functionality and am not sure what I need to do to implement it with my current set up. I was able to set up a Login functionality that pulls the correct profile data and once logged in, the Navbar + Dropdown Items are updated to display a link to logout. However, I am unsure of how I can add the logout functionality at the moment. I have been following guides but am stuck since nothing I am trying is working, once I hit a the logout link it links to /logout but fails to actually logout. The tutorial I am following claims I can do it via the frontend (I am using JWT).

Navbar.jsx:

When defining my actions, reducer, and selectors I wanted to try to keep these in separate files so that my folder structure looks like this:

I am building a React app that uses Redux-Thunks. I am receiving an error message and cannot figure out how to resolve it. I am new to using Redux-Thunks and have been using this tutorial to set up . I checked all my dependencies and files to ensure I did as instructed but still I have been unable to resolve this bug.

The error message is:

pages.thunks.js

I need to wait until dispatch in thunks is done. After that, I have to set state of hook to true.

Here is my service:

Is it possible to separate out the feature of an RTK-based application that depend on different slices of a the redux store into separate node packages? Assuming so, what is the best way to do that?

We have a large, and growing, app that is based around Redux Toolkit. Where possible we try to separate parts of the application into their own node packages. We find there are a lot of benefits to doing this, including:

• Maintainability of codebase
• Fine-grained control over intra-application dependencies
• Testability

It's easy enough to do this for cross-cutting things, like logging, http requests, routing, etc. But we would like to go further and modularize the "features" of our app. For example, have the "address book" feature of our application live in a different module than, say, the "messages" feature, with them all composed together via an "app" package.

The benefits we see here are ones we have found in other codebases and have been discussed in other places. (E.g., here for iOS). But, in brief: (1) you can see and control intra-app dependencies. For example, you can easily see if the "messages" feature depends on the "address book" feature and make explicit decisions about how you will expose the one feature to the other via what you export; (2) you can build fully testable sub-parts of the app by simply having a "preview" package that only composes in the things you want to test, e.g., you could have a "contact app" package that only depends on the "contact" feature for building and testing just that; (3) you can speed up CI/CD times by not needing to compile (TS/babel), pack/minify, and unit test every part; (4) you can utilize various analytics tools to get more fine-grained pictures of how each feature is developing.

There may well be other ways to achieve these things, and some may disagree with the premise that this is a good way to do it. That's not the focus of the question, but I'm open to the possibility it may be the best answer (e.g., some one with significant Redux experience may explain why this is a bad idea).

We've struggled to come up with a good way to do this with Redux Toolkit. The problem seems to boil down to -- is there a good way to modularize (via separate node packages) the various "slices" used in RTK? (This may apply to other Redux implementations but we are heavily invested in RTK).

It's easy enough to have a package that exports the various items that will be used by the redux store, i.e., the slice state, action creators, async thunks, and selectors. And RTK will then compose those very nicely in the higher-level app. In other words, you can easily have an "app" package that holds the store, and then a "contacts" package that exports the "contacts" slice, with its attendant actions, thunks, selectors, etc.

The problem comes if you also want the components and hooks that use that portion of slice to live in the same package as the slice, e.g., in the "contacts" package. Those components/hooks will need access to the global dispatch and the global useSelector hook to really work, but that only exists in the "app" component, i.e., the feature that composes together the various feature packages.

1. We could export the global dispatch and useSelector from the "higher" level "app" package, but then our sub-components now depend on the higher level packages. That means we can no longer build alternate higher level packages that compose different arrangements of sub packages.

2. We could use separate stores. This has been discussed in the past regarding Redux and has been discouraged, although there is some suggestion it might be OK if you are trying to achieve modularization. These discussions are also somewhat old.

Is it possible to separate out the feature of an RTK-based application that depend on different slices of a the redux store into separate node packages? Assuming so, what is the best way to do that?

While I'm primarily interested if if/how this can be done in RTK, I'd also be interested in answers--especially from folks with experience with RTK/redux on large apps--as to whether this is Bad Idea and what other approaches are taken to achieve the benefits of modularization.

An imperative programmer for a long time, every so often I look back in on Haskell and play a little more and learn a little more.

A question arose when thinking about a possible project:

How to implement data that I explicitly want to change in a language that treats data as immutable?

A specific case is the text that is edited by a text editor. Data.Text is available but it says things like appending a character to the end of a text involves copying the entire text over. Because of things like that, I'm wondering if Data.Text is the appropriate structure to use to implement text who's purpose is to change.

Is there a generalized thinking that addresses this sort of thing?

Over the years, I've written two implementations of text machinery in C#. One used a linked list of blocks of 256 (or 512, I forget, it's been a while) characters, similar to what's described in the Sam text editor. The other is a slightly modified version of a design done by Niklaus Wirth (who got it from someone else) in the Oberon System where text is implemented by two files (one for the original text, the other for newly entered data) and a linked list of pieces that is used to assemble and edit the text. I used two .NET StringBuilders instead of files, only append to them, and the whole things performs much better that just using StringBuilders as the text itself.

Note: I have a reasonable working knowledge of laziness, strictness, tail-recursion, thunks. Fusion is less clear to me but I've read a little on it.

I have a good bit of experience with SQL so I don't have a problem with a compiler doing things I don't fully understand, but in that language I know how to conceptualize the problem better than I do in Hasell.

I'm building a redux toolkit website, where i'll have a grid. So, to use this grid I am using the async thunk to fetch data from the back-end, and then send it to my redux slice. This code were working, but when I did a merge with another changes, it stopped. I already changed the default export to a common export default test = { ... }, then the error changed to "cannot access test before initialization".

My slice:

I'm currently converting the sagas in the code base to thunks.

I know that Sagas' specific functions such yield put, yield call have a "direct translation" to thunks dispatch(...) and await fn....

I came across yield take which from what I understand takes a set of actions included in the store and instructs the middleware to wait for one of those specified actions from the store and the result is an action object that gets dispatched?

What would be the "equivalent" if using Redux thunks?

Many thanks!