😅 I like the coincidence, as I already had a naming question today.
We currently try to split up our composables into container (with viewmodel) and stateless view.
In this example the container is suffixed with
Route
- which I do not like. I also do not like to suffix the view with
View
- as this term is really overloaded on Android.
Any suggestions?
✅ 1
l
Liudas Survila
10/19/2022, 9:25 AM
I do like https://bradfrost.com/blog/post/atomic-web-design/ I feel it fits nice declarative ui. Where Page/Screen is the real thing that takes in view model dependency. And Template that is reusable screen component you pass state from view model / preview / instrumentation tests, etc....
j
Jonas
10/19/2022, 9:28 AM
@Liudas Survila thx for the response. That makes the question even more complex as we have our own library with the atomic design templates we then use in the view. 😉 Means: we reuse atomic design templates on multiple screens/views.
s
Stylianos Gakis
10/19/2022, 11:11 AM
So what is it that makes the “Route” suffix not work for your case?
If your app is structured where each destination is a screen, and you can refer to it as a “route” it feels quite fitting and I wouldn’t try to give it a new name.
What makes you dislike the “Route” suffix by itself?
j
Jonas
10/19/2022, 12:46 PM
We settled on the route suffix after an internal discussion. Thx again for the inputs.
p
Pablichjenkov
10/19/2022, 6:46 PM
Route sounds good, I believe there is another navigation Library named "Conductor" that uses Route too.
I use Node suffix that contains a ScreenX. Each ScreenX receives its own ScreenXState.