Updated examples in Readme

[vishnun]

The code said actions: {} but the codepen says reducers: {}
So, updating the readme to be in sync with the actual working code.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #131 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

@@          Coverage Diff          @@
##           master   #131   +/-   ##
=====================================
  Coverage     100%   100%           
=====================================
  Files           4      4           
  Lines         171    171           
=====================================
  Hits          171    171

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 62df419...2b0a5bd. Read the comment docs.

[jorgebucaran]

Thanks @vishnun, after #127, reducers/effects became actions, and I'm still updating everything. Everything should be in synced soon.

[jamen]

So I'm just using hyperapp today. I think I remember things in the wiki need revisions too.

[jorgebucaran]

Hi @jamen! Yep. Going through those too as we speak. The CodePen examples are out of date because I haven't released 0.7.0, but I intend to do that very soon too.

[FlorianWendelborn]

@jamen That's actually a good point against using the wiki. If we move the docs to master they will always fit the revision you checked out in git.

[jorgebucaran]

@dodekeract I don't think the most common use case for hyperapp is to clone the repo.

I prefer a wiki (and will use a wiki from now on in future projects too). This is a decision I reached after more than 200 commits to the now-deprecated user manual and weighing cons and pros in my head. The main reasons I favor public wikis are:

1. Makes editing docs easier for maintainers. I'd like to commit something and see how it looks and change my mind based on gut and feeling a lot.
2. Makes editing docs easy for anyone else since they don't have to create a PR. They don't even have to let maintainers know. I like this openness.
3. It's a GitHub feature and I am using GitHub. If docs were on the repo or as a separate document / website, I'd have to use the wiki for something else or disable it. Disabling the wiki is acceptable if docs would go on a website, but websites incur a cost, whereas using the wiki is "free".

There may (likely going to) be a website for hyperapp in the future. I think the website can and should be used as a marketing device. It's okay to show benchmark results, tell that hyperapp is cool, show examples, talk about its features, etc.

The repo, however, should avoid all sort of opinionated stuff like that and focus on what the project is, what it does, include examples and easy to access / update, no-nonsense documentation.

[FlorianWendelborn]

@jbucaran The use-case isn't to "clone the repo" the use case is to be able to work with older versions of hyperapp without knowing every single detail.

There'll be issues when we switch from v1 to v2 since we have to destroy the old wiki.

websites cost incur a cost

What do you mean?

[jorgebucaran]

There'll be issues when we switch from v1 to v2 since we have to destroy the old wiki.

No idea what that means.

[jorgebucaran]

Okay, I see what you mean.

Hyperapp v1, then v2 changes everything and there would be no v2 documentation.

[FlorianWendelborn]

@jbucaran v2 will by definition have breaking changes compared to v1. We only have one wiki. Having the docs in master means they're always the important ones, no matter which revision you look at.

I actually mean the opposite. We release v2 and then we'd have to destroy the v1 documentation to make space for v2.

[jorgebucaran]

🤔 I didn't consider that possibility. That definitely poses an interesting problem.

I think this particular project has the potential to avoid that scenario, as I hope to lock/freeze the API with 1.0. If there's a 2.0 there may be new features, but no removal of older ones.

This is not something I'm really worried about at the moment, but thanks for opening my eyes.

[liadbiz]

If there's a 2.0 there may be new features, but no removal of older ones.

not really, IMO, vue and angular actually have some big changes between v1 and v2, you can not always control what software is going on...however, wiki is a good place to place some tutorial that explains concepts and architecture, which mostly will not change between versions, to help users and contributors to undersatnd repo, but api need another place like standalone website.