This tutorial explains re-frame Interceptors. By the end, you'll much better understand the mechanics of event handling.
As you read this, refer back to the 3rd panel of the Infographic.
Two reasons.
First, we want simple event handlers.
Interceptors can look after "cross-cutting" concerns like undo, tracing and validation. They help us to factor out commonality, hide complexity and introduce further steps into the "Derived Data, Flowing" story promoted by re-frame.
So, you'll want to use Interceptors because they solve problems, and help you to write nice code.
Second, under the covers, Interceptors provide the mechanism by which
event handlers are executed (when you dispatch
). They are a central concept.
They wrap.
Specifically, they wrap event handlers.
Imagine your event handler is like a piece of ham. An interceptor would be like bread on either side of your ham, which makes a sandwich.
And two Interceptors, in a chain, would be like you put another pair of bread slices around the outside of the existing sandwich to make a sandwich of the sandwich. Now it is a very thick sandwich.
Interceptors wrap on both sides of a handler, layer after layer.
Interceptors implement middleware. But differently.
Traditional middleware - often seen in web servers - creates a data processing pipeline via the nested composition of higher order functions. The result is a "stack" of functions. Data flows through this pipeline, first forwards from one end to the other, and then backwards.
Interceptors achieve the same outcome by assembling functions, as data, in a collection (a chain, rather than a stack). Data can then be iteratively pipelined, first forwards through the functions in the chain, and then backwards along the same chain.
Because the interceptor pipeline is composed via data, rather than higher order functions, it is a more flexible arrangement.
Data. It flows through the pipeline being progressively transformed.
Fine. But what data?
With a web server, the middleware "stack" progressively
transforms a request
in one direction, and, then in the backwards
sweep, it progressively produces a response
.
In re-frame, the forwards sweep progressively creates the coeffects
(inputs to the event handler), while the backwards sweep processes the effects
(outputs from the event handler).
I'll pause while you read that sentence again. That's the key concept, right there.
At the time when you register an event handler, you can provide a chain of interceptors too.
Using a 3-arity registration function:
(reg-event-db
:some-id
[in1 in2] ;; <--- a chain of 2 interceptors
(fn [db v] ;; <-- the handler here, as before
....)))
Each Event Handler can have its own tailored interceptor chain, provided at registration-time.
You might see that registration above as associating :some-id
with
two things: (1) a chain of 2 interceptors [in1 in2]
and (2) a handler.
Except, the handler is turned into an interceptor too (we'll see how shortly).
So :some-id
is only associated with one thing: a 3-chain of interceptors,
with the handler wrapped in an interceptor, called say h
, and put on the
end of the other two: [in1 in2 h]
.
Except, the registration function itself, reg-event-db
, actually takes this 3-chain
and inserts its own standard interceptors, called say std1
and std2
(which do useful things, more soon) at the front,
so ACTUALLY, there's about 5 interceptors in the chain: [std1 std2 in1 in2 h]
So, ultimately, that event registration associates the event id :some-id
with just a chain of interceptors. Nothing more.
Later, when a (dispatch [:some-id ...])
happens, that 5-chain of
interceptors will be "executed". And that's how an event gets handled.
Each interceptor has this form:
{:id :something ;; decorative only
:before (fn [context] ...) ;; returns possibly modified context
:after (fn [context] ...)} ;; `identity` would be a noop
That's essentially a map of two functions. Now imagine a vector of these maps - that's an interceptor chain.
Above we imagined an interceptor chain of [std1 std2 in1 in2 h]
. Now we know that this is really
a vector of 5 maps: [{...} {...} {...} {...} {...}]
where each of the 5 maps have
a :before
and :after
fn.
Sometimes, the :before
and :after
fns are noops (think identity
).
To "execute" an interceptor chain:
- create a
context
(a map, described below) - iterate forwards over the chain, calling the
:before
function on each interceptor - iterate over the chain in the opposite direction calling the
:after
function on each interceptor
Remember that the last interceptor in the chain is the handler itself (wrapped up to be the :before
).
That's it. That's how an event gets handled.
Some data called a context
is threaded through all the calls.
This value is passed as the argument to every :before
and :after
function and it is returned by each function, possibly modified.
A context
is a map with this structure:
{:coeffects {:event [:some-id :some-param]
:db <original contents of app-db>}
:effects {:db <new value for app-db>
:dispatch [:an-event-id :param1]}
:queue <a collection of further interceptors>
:stack <a collection of interceptors already walked>}
context
has :coeffects
and :effects
which, if this was a web
server, would be somewhat analogous to request
and response
respectively.
:coeffects
will contain the inputs required by the event handler
(sitting presumably on the end of the chain). So that's
data like the :event
being processed, and the initial state of db
.
The handler-returned side effects are put into :effects
including,
but not limited to, new values for db
.
The first few interceptors in a chain (inserted by reg-event-db
)
have :before
functions which prime the :coeffects
by adding in :event
, and :db
. Of course, other interceptors can
add further to :coeffects
. Perhaps the event handler needs
data from localstore, or a random number, or a
DataScript connection. Interceptors can build up :coeffects
, via their
:before
.
Equally, some interceptors in the chain will have :after
functions
which process the side effects accumulated into :effects
including, but not limited to, updates to app-db.
Through both stages (before and after), context
contains a :queue
of interceptors yet to be processed, and a :stack
of interceptors
already done.
In advanced cases, these values can be modified by the Interceptor
functions through which the context
is threaded.
What I'm saying is that interceptors can be dynamically added
and removed from the :queue
by existing Interceptors.
All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered
-- Galileo Galilei
Things always become obvious after the fact
-- Nassim Nicholas Taleb
This elegant and flexible arrangement was originally designed by the talented Pedestal Team. Thanks!
Dunno about you, but I'm easily offended by underscores.
If we had a view which did this:
(dispatch [:delete-item 42])
We'd have to write this handler:
(reg-event-db
:delete-item
(fn
[db [_ key-to-delete]] ;; <---- Arrgggghhh underscore
(dissoc db key-to-delete)))
Do you see it there? In the event destructuring!!! Almost mocking us with that passive aggressive, understated thing it has going on!! Co-workers have said I'm "being overly sensitive", perhaps even pixel-ist, but you can see it, right? Of course you can.
What a relief it would be to not have it there, but how? We'll write an interceptor: trim-event
Once we have written trim-event
, our registration will change to look like this:
(reg-event-db
:delete-item
[trim-event] ;; <--- interceptor added
(fn
[db [key-to-delete]] ;; <---yaaah! no leading underscore
(dissoc db key-to-delete)))
trim-event
will need to change the :coeffects
map (within context
). Specifically, it will be
changing the :event
value within the :coeffects
.
:event
will start off as [:delete-item 42]
, but will end up [42]
. trim-event
will remove that
leading :delete-item
because, by the time the event is
being processed, we already know what id it has.
And, here it is:
(def trim-event
(re-frame.core/->interceptor
:id :trim-event
:before (fn [context]
(let [trim-fn (fn [event] (-> event rest vec))]
(update-in context [:coeffects :event] trim-fn)))))
As you read this, look back to what a context
looks like.
Notes:
- We use
->interceptor
to create an interceptor (which is just a map) - Our interceptor only has a
:before
function - Our
:before
is givencontext
. It modifies it and returns it. - There is no
:after
for this Interceptor. It has nothing to do with the backwards processing flow of:effects
. It is concerned only with:coeffects
in the forward flow.
We're going well. Let's do an advanced wrapping.
Earlier, in the "Handlers Are Interceptors Too" section, I explained that event handlers
are wrapped in an Interceptor and placed on the end of an Interceptor chain. Remember the
whole [std1 std2 in1 in2 h]
thing?
We'll now look at the h
bit. How does an event handler get wrapped to be an Interceptor?
Reminder - there's two kinds of handler:
- the
-db
variety registered byreg-event-db
- the
-fx
variety registered byreg-event-fx
I'll now show how to wrap the -db
variety.
Reminder: here's what a -db
handler looks like:
(fn [db event] ;; takes two params
(assoc db :flag true)) ;; returns a new db
So, we'll be writing a function which takes a -db
handler and returns an
Interceptor which wraps that handler:
(defn db-handler->interceptor
[db-handler-fn]
(re-frame.core/->interceptor ;; a utility function supplied by re-frame
:id :db-handler ;; ids are decorative only
:before (fn [context]
(let [{:keys [db event]} (:coeffects context) ;; extract db and event from coeffects
new-db (db-handler-fn db event)] ;; call the handler
(assoc-in context [:effects :db] new-db)))))) ;; put db back into :effects
Notes:
- Notice how this wrapper extracts data from the
context's
:coeffects
and then calls the handler with that data (a handler must be called withdb
andevent
) - Equally notice how this wrapping takes the return value from
db-handler-fn
handler and puts it intocontext's
:effects
- The modified
context
(it has a new:effects
) is returned - This is all done in
:before
. There is no:after
(it is a noop). But this could have been reversed with the work happening in:after
and:before
a noop. Shrug. Remember that this Interceptor will be on the end of a chain.
Feeling confident? Try writing the wrapper for -fx
handlers - it is just a small variation.
In this tutorial, we've learned:
1. When you register an event handler, you can supply a collection of interceptors:
(reg-event-db
:some-id
[in1 in2] ;; <--- a chain of 2 interceptors
(fn [db v] ;; <-- real handler here
....)))
2. When you are registering an event handler, you are associating an event id with a chain of interceptors including:
- the ones you supply (optional)
- an extra one on the end, which wraps the handler itself
- a couple at the beginning of the chain, put there by the
reg-event-db
orreg-event-fx
.
3. An Interceptor Chain is executed in two stages. First a forwards sweep in which
all :before
functions are called, and then second, a backwards sweep in which the
:after
functions are called. A context
will be threaded through all these calls.
4. Interceptors do interesting things:
- add to coeffects (data inputs to the handler)
- process side effects (returned by a handler)
- produce logs
- further process
In the next Tutorial, we'll look at (side) Effects in more depth. Later again, we'll look at Coeffects.
re-frame comes with some built-in Interceptors:
- debug: log each event as it is processed. Shows incremental
clojure.data/diff
reports. - trim-v: a convenience. More readable handlers.
And some Interceptor factories (functions that return Interceptors):
- enrich: perform additional computations (validations?), after the handler has run. More derived data flowing.
- after: perform side effects, after a handler has run. Eg: use it to report if the data in
app-db
matches a schema. - path: a convenience. Simplifies our handlers. Acts almost like
update-in
.
In addition, a Library like re-frame-undo provides an Interceptor
factory called undoable
which checkpoints app state.
To use them, first require them:
(ns my.core
(:require
[re-frame.core :refer [debug path]])
Previous: Effectful Handlers Up: Index Next: Effects