Update API to better match Promise spec and add the 'status' prop (closes #35)

[ghengeveld]

• Breaking change: Async.Pending was renamed to Async.Initial
• Added the status prop, which can be one of initial, pending, fulfilled or rejected
• Added isInitial, isPending, isFulfilled (with alias isResolved), isRejected and isSettled boolean props. isLoading is now an alias for isPending.
• Added separate TypeScript types for each status, to make various props non-optional.

The pending and fulfilled statuses were chosen over loading and resolved because they better match the terminology in the Promise specification. The Pending helper component was renamed to Initial accordingly, causing a breaking change.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #37 into master will increase coverage by 1.21%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #37      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage    98.4%   99.61%   +1.21%     
==========================================
  Files           4        5       +1     
  Lines         502      525      +23     
  Branches      101      112      +11     
==========================================
+ Hits          494      523      +29     
+ Misses          4        2       -2     
+ Partials        4        0       -4

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/status.js	100% <100%> (ø)
src/useAsync.js	98.71% <100%> (+6.95%)	⬆️
src/specs.js	99.61% <100%> (ø)	⬆️
src/Async.js	100% <100%> (ø)	⬆️
src/reducer.js	100% <100%> (ø)	⬆️

---

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 3d450b4...4cdf0ab. Read the comment docs.

[ghengeveld]

This branch is available as a pre-release on npm:

npm install react-async@next

or:

npm install [email protected]

[dhurlburtusa]

@ghengeveld Hello, before you create release 6.x, I wondered if you have considered simplifying some of the properties?

For example, I think it would be nice to just have a single promise property instead of promise and promiseFn. The updated promise property could be a function that returns a Promise or it could be a promise.

Maybe do something similar for watch and watchFn or for deferFn.

[ghengeveld]

Thanks for the suggestion. I've considered this when I introduced watchFn. The reason it's a separate property is that there could also be a legitimate need to watch a function reference itself (rather than invoke it). As for promiseFn, I prefer to mirror deferFn. deferFn itself can't accept a Promise instance as that defeats the purpose, so renaming it to defer would be very confusing.

[ghengeveld]

@all-contributors please add @dhurlburtusa for ideas

[allcontributors]

@ghengeveld

I've put up a pull request to add @dhurlburtusa! 🎉