Stockticker refactored

[taranvohra]

No description provided.

[markerikson]

Looks really good! The only issue I have is that <Slice> is now issuing the updates, which means that we'll have 4 * NUM_SLICES updates being triggered each time around rather than just 4. Also, part of the point of the exercise is to have varying slices being updated each time, rather than the same slices.

What I'd like to see is a random slice and a random ID in that slice being updated each time. Tell you what - how about we move the randomization logic into a thunk or something in index.js, and have the timers do this:

function updateRandomEntry() {
    // calculate random slice
    // calculate random ID
    store.dispatch(updatePair(slice, id));
}

setInterval(updateRandomEntry, 50);

[taranvohra]

Good idea. I moved the update logic to index.js so the decision as to which slice and pair to update is randomized now

[markerikson]

Thanks, appreciate it!

If you can go ahead and do the same for the others (ideally today), that'd be great.

[markerikson]

So after merging this, I just realized there's an issue:

function updateRandomPairInSlice() {
    const sliceId = Math.floor(Math.random() * c.NUMBER_OF_SLICES) + 1;
    const pairId = Math.floor(Math.random() * (c.NUM_ENTRIES / c.NUMBER_OF_SLICES)) + 1;
    store.dispatch(updatePair(sliceId, pairId));
}

The slices themselves are going to be numbered 0...N-1 because of the reduce() call, but this is going to generate slice IDs of 1...N. So, slice 0 will never get updated, and actions with a slice ID of N will result in no update at all. The + 1 values need to be removed, or at least the slice one does (not sure on the math for the pair ID yet).

I'll tweak that and push the change.

[taranvohra]

Right. removing the +1 would solve the problem generating id's from 0..N-1. I think the same fix should suffice for pairId because adding a 1 would make pairId 0 not update at all

[markerikson]

Yep, just fixed that and pushed.