Subs or Substitutions? about hyperapp HOT 9 CLOSED

It's not like people would have to type the term a thousand times. It's just once. T

Good point.

What do you folks think? @danigb @itrelease @maraisr @tzellman @evgenykochetkov @terkelg

I'm 💯 with the idea.

from hyperapp.

I was thinking the same thing. subscriptions is better if you want shorter name subscribes is better than subs too.

from hyperapp.

I like subs for brevity, but I agree that subscriptions may be more obvious. You could always settle with var subs = options.subscriptions || options.subs || {}.

from hyperapp.

Shipped. See the release notes.

from hyperapp.

I think it's a good idea considering that it's inspired by Elm.App it would be nice to go along with same naming for api

from hyperapp.

I agree, good idea!

from hyperapp.

subs is an array, so its description should be a noun, not a verb. subscribes would indicate a function.

from hyperapp.

@rbiggs Changed to subscriptions. Code still handles and will handle .subs for a while, at least after >=0.0.13, examples have been updated and due mourn time has been given.

from hyperapp.

@rbiggs Can this be closed?

@jbucaran Is there anything else to do before releasing 0.0.13? I'd like to have the subscriptions fix available for usage. 🙂
In addition to that 0.0.12 changed the import to hyperapp/hx and the longer we wait to undo this the more people will use that change just to undo it in 0.0.13.

from hyperapp.