I have been looking at Flux for a while now and I have reach a dilemma.

If you are familiar with this architecture, one of its central pieces is the Dispatcher:

The dispatcher is the central hub that manages all data flow in a Flux application. It is essentially a registry of callbacks into the stores and has no real intelligence of its own — it is a simple mechanism for distributing the actions to the stores.

I don't need to register callbacks; I expose a signal that will be observed by the Stores[1]:

In case you are wondering, the Action itself is an empty protocol. [1:1] So who implements the Action protocol? Well, different enums for specific domains of the application[1:2]: authentication, fetch feeds, etc.

Now, this is where the problem begins. The store is observing a Signal of type Signal<Action, NoError>. But, although each store should be able to observe any kind of Action [1:3], it leads me to this kind of pattern inside a store:

Which I kind of hate. As it stands, I have a couple of options, which I will explore in a later post.

  1. Flux states: "Within the store's registered callback, a switch statement based on the action's type is used to interpret the action and to provide the proper hooks into the store's internal methods" ↩ī¸Ž ↩ī¸Ž ↩ī¸Ž ↩ī¸Ž