ShapeShift integration #652
|
@ -12,6 +12,9 @@ flow-typed
|
|||
suppress_comment=\\(.\\|\n\\)*\\$FlowFixMe
|
||||
suppress_comment=\\(.\\|\n\\)*\\$FlowIssue
|
||||
module.name_mapper='^constants\(.*\)$' -> '<PROJECT_ROOT>/js/constants\1'
|
||||
module.name_mapper='^util\(.*\)$' -> '<PROJECT_ROOT>/js/util\1'
|
||||
module.name_mapper='^redux\(.*\)$' -> '<PROJECT_ROOT>/js/redux\1'
|
||||
module.name_mapper='^types\(.*\)$' -> '<PROJECT_ROOT>/js/types\1'
|
||||
module.name_mapper='^component\(.*\)$' -> '<PROJECT_ROOT>/js/component\1'
|
||||
|
||||
[strict]
|
||||
|
|
3
src/renderer/flow-typed/bluebird.js
vendored
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
|
|||
declare module 'bluebird' {
|
||||
Have you checked if flow-typed has any of the type definitions? https://github.com/flowtype/flow-typed
Have you checked if flow-typed has any of the type definitions?
https://github.com/flowtype/flow-typed
`yarn run flow-typed install bluebird`
|
||||
declare module.exports: any;
|
||||
}
|
3
src/renderer/flow-typed/classnames.js
vendored
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
|
|||
declare module 'classnames' {
|
||||
declare module.exports: any;
|
||||
}
|
3
src/renderer/flow-typed/formik.js
vendored
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
|
|||
declare module 'formik' {
|
||||
declare module.exports: any;
|
||||
}
|
1
src/renderer/flow-typed/i18n.js
vendored
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1 @@
|
|||
declare function __(a: string): string;
|
3
src/renderer/flow-typed/qrcode.react.js
vendored
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
|
|||
declare module 'qrcode.react' {
|
||||
declare module.exports: any;
|
||||
}
|
3
src/renderer/flow-typed/shapeshift.io.js
vendored
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
|
|||
declare module 'shapeshift.io' {
|
||||
declare module.exports: any;
|
||||
}
|
7
src/renderer/js/component/address/index.js
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
|
|||
import { connect } from "react-redux";
|
||||
import { doShowSnackBar } from "redux/actions/app";
|
||||
import Address from "./view";
|
||||
|
||||
export default connect(null, {
|
||||
doShowSnackBar,
|
||||
})(Address);
|
52
src/renderer/js/component/address/view.jsx
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
|
|||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
import React from "react";
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
import PropTypes from "prop-types";
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
import { clipboard } from "electron";
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
import Link from "component/link";
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
import classnames from "classnames";
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
export default class Address extends React.PureComponent {
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
static propTypes = {
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
address: PropTypes.string,
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
};
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
constructor(props) {
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
super(props);
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
this._inputElem = null;
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
}
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
render() {
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
const { address, showCopyButton, doShowSnackBar } = this.props;
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
return (
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
<div className="form-field form-field--address">
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
<input
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
className={classnames("input-copyable", {
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
"input-copyable--with-copy-btn": showCopyButton,
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
})}
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
type="text"
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
ref={input => {
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
this._inputElem = input;
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
}}
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
onFocus={() => {
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
this._inputElem.select();
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
}}
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
readOnly="readonly"
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
value={address || ""}
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
/>
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
{showCopyButton && (
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
<span className="header__item">
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
<Link
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
button="alt button--flat"
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
icon="clipboard"
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
onClick={() => {
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
clipboard.writeText(address);
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
doShowSnackBar({ message: __("Address copied") });
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
}}
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
/>
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
</span>
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
)}
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
);
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
}
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
||||
}
|
||||
Whoops. You're right. I'll update Whoops. You're right. I'll update
all good now 👍 all good now 👍
|
|
@ -137,42 +137,6 @@ export class CreditAmount extends React.PureComponent {
|
|||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
let addressStyle = {
|
||||
fontFamily:
|
||||
'"Consolas", "Lucida Console", "Adobe Source Code Pro", monospace',
|
||||
};
|
||||
export class Address extends React.PureComponent {
|
||||
static propTypes = {
|
||||
address: PropTypes.string,
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
constructor(props) {
|
||||
super(props);
|
||||
|
||||
this._inputElem = null;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
render() {
|
||||
return (
|
||||
<div className="form-field form-field--address">
|
||||
<input
|
||||
className="input-copyable"
|
||||
type="text"
|
||||
ref={input => {
|
||||
this._inputElem = input;
|
||||
}}
|
||||
onFocus={() => {
|
||||
this._inputElem.select();
|
||||
}}
|
||||
style={addressStyle}
|
||||
readOnly="readonly"
|
||||
value={this.props.address || ""}
|
||||
/>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
export class Thumbnail extends React.PureComponent {
|
||||
static propTypes = {
|
||||
src: PropTypes.string,
|
||||
|
|
16
src/renderer/js/component/common/spinner.jsx
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
|
|||
import React from "react";
|
||||
import classnames from "classnames";
|
||||
|
||||
export default ({ dark, className }) => {
|
||||
return (
|
||||
<div
|
||||
className={classnames(
|
||||
"spinner",
|
||||
{
|
||||
"spinner--dark": dark,
|
||||
},
|
||||
className
|
||||
)}
|
||||
/>
|
||||
);
|
||||
};
|
|
@ -14,11 +14,12 @@ const Link = props => {
|
|||
navigate,
|
||||
navigateParams,
|
||||
doNavigate,
|
||||
className,
|
||||
} = props;
|
||||
|
||||
const className =
|
||||
(props.className || "") +
|
||||
(!props.className && !button ? "button-text" : "") + // Non-button links get the same look as text buttons
|
||||
const combinedClassName =
|
||||
(className || "") +
|
||||
(!className && !button ? "button-text" : "") + // Non-button links get the same look as text buttons
|
||||
(button ? " button-block button-" + button + " button-set-item" : "") +
|
||||
(disabled ? " disabled" : "");
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -43,7 +44,7 @@ const Link = props => {
|
|||
|
||||
return (
|
||||
<a
|
||||
className={className}
|
||||
className={combinedClassName}
|
||||
href={href || "javascript:;"}
|
||||
title={title}
|
||||
onClick={onClick}
|
||||
|
|
26
src/renderer/js/component/shapeShift/index.js
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
|
|||
import { connect } from "react-redux";
|
||||
import {
|
||||
createShapeShift,
|
||||
shapeShiftInit,
|
||||
getCoinStats,
|
||||
clearShapeShift,
|
||||
getActiveShift,
|
||||
} from "redux/actions/shape_shift";
|
||||
import { doShowSnackBar } from "redux/actions/app";
|
||||
import { selectReceiveAddress } from "redux/selectors/wallet";
|
||||
import { selectShapeShift } from "redux/selectors/shape_shift";
|
||||
import ShapeShift from "./view";
|
||||
|
||||
const select = state => ({
|
||||
receiveAddress: selectReceiveAddress(state),
|
||||
shapeShift: selectShapeShift(state),
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
export default connect(select, {
|
||||
shapeShiftInit,
|
||||
getCoinStats,
|
||||
createShapeShift,
|
||||
clearShapeShift,
|
||||
getActiveShift,
|
||||
doShowSnackBar,
|
||||
})(ShapeShift);
|
161
src/renderer/js/component/shapeShift/internal/active-shift.jsx
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,161 @@
|
|||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
// @flow
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
import * as React from "react";
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
import QRCode from "qrcode.react";
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
import * as statuses from "constants/shape_shift";
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
import Address from "component/address";
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
import Link from "component/link";
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
import type { Dispatch } from "redux/actions/shape_shift";
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
import ShiftMarketInfo from "./market_info";
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
type Props = {
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shiftState: ?string,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shiftCoinType: ?string,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shiftDepositAddress: ?string,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shiftReturnAddress: ?string,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shiftOrderId: ?string,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax: ?number,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
clearShapeShift: Dispatch,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
doShowSnackBar: Dispatch,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
getActiveShift: Dispatch,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shapeShiftRate: ?number,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax: ?number,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee: ?number,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin: ?string,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
};
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
class ActiveShapeShift extends React.PureComponent<Props> {
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
continousFetch: ?number;
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
constructor() {
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
super();
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
this.continousFetch = undefined;
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
componentDidMount() {
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
const { getActiveShift, shiftDepositAddress } = this.props;
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
getActiveShift(shiftDepositAddress);
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
this.continousFetch = setInterval(() => {
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
getActiveShift(shiftDepositAddress);
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
}, 10000);
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
componentWillUpdate(nextProps: Props) {
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
const { shiftState } = nextProps;
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
if (shiftState === statuses.COMPLETE) {
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
this.clearContinuousFetch();
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
componentWillUnmount() {
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
this.clearContinuousFetch();
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
clearContinuousFetch() {
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
if (this.continousFetch) {
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
clearInterval(this.continousFetch);
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
this.continousFetch = null;
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
render() {
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
const {
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shiftCoinType,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shiftDepositAddress,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shiftReturnAddress,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shiftOrderId,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shiftState,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
clearShapeShift,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
doShowSnackBar,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shapeShiftRate,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin,
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
} = this.props;
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
return (
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
{shiftState === statuses.NO_DEPOSITS && (
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<p>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
Send up to{" "}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<span className="credit-amount--bold">
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
{originCoinDepositMax} {shiftCoinType}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</span>{" "}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
to the address below.
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<ShiftMarketInfo
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
originCoin={shiftCoinType}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shapeShiftRate={shapeShiftRate}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee={originCoinDepositFee}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin={originCoinDepositMin}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax={originCoinDepositMax}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
/>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<div className="shapeshift__deposit-address-wrapper">
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<Address address={shiftDepositAddress} showCopyButton />
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<div className="shapeshift__qrcode">
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<QRCode value={shiftDepositAddress} />
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
)}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
{shiftState === statuses.RECEIVED && (
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<div className="card__content--extra-vertical-space">
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<p>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
{__(
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
"ShapeShift has received your payment! Sending the funds to your LBRY wallet."
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
)}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<span className="help">
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
{__("This can take a while, especially with BTC.")}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</span>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
)}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
{shiftState === statuses.COMPLETE && (
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<div className="card__content--extra-vertical-space">
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<p>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
{__(
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
"Transaction complete! You should see the new LBC in your wallet."
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
)}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
)}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<div className="card__actions card__actions--only-vertical">
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<Link
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
button={shiftState === statuses.COMPLETE ? "primary" : "alt"}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
onClick={clearShapeShift}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
label={
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shiftState === statuses.COMPLETE ||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shiftState === statuses.RECEIVED
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
? __("Done")
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
: __("Cancel")
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
/>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
{shiftOrderId && (
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<span className="shapeshift__link">
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<Link
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
button="text"
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
label={__("View the status on Shapeshift.io")}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
href={`https://shapeshift.io/#/status/${shiftOrderId}`}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
/>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</span>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
)}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
{shiftState === statuses.NO_DEPOSITS &&
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
shiftReturnAddress && (
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<div className="shapeshift__actions-help">
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
<span className="help">
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
If the transaction doesn't go through, ShapeShift will return
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
your {shiftCoinType} back to {shiftReturnAddress}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</span>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
)}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
);
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
}
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
||||
export default ActiveShapeShift;
|
||||
Good idea Good idea
Try Try `button="text"` here.
Add "." Add "."
Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again. Add ".". Also, let's link to FAQ here again.
I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this. I'm not in love with "New" here - maybe just "Reset"? Though I don't like this either. As a (potentially weird) user, I have a desire for things to be back in their default state when "Done". But I don't necessary want to do a new one. I just want it back to where it was. Not sure on best name for this.
Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is. Also this should probably be primary, whatever the label is.
I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better). We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it" I'm not sure how much I like that button. What if they click it before actually sending? We would need some new bit of UI to say "We will keep pinging shapeshit to see if you actually sent it" (obviously worded better).
We say "this will update automatically" and have a link to the shapeshift status page, I don't see any reason to create another shift status "user says they sent it but shapeshift hasn't received it"
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
outside of the constructor, I think you need to add
`continuousFetch: ?number;`
as per https://flow.org/en/docs/types/classes/
this should get rid of all the flow fix mes this should get rid of all the flow fix mes
|
109
src/renderer/js/component/shapeShift/internal/form.jsx
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
|
|||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
import React from "react";
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
import Link from "component/link";
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
import { getExampleAddress } from "util/shape_shift";
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
import { Submit, FormRow } from "component/form";
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
import type { ShapeShiftFormValues, Dispatch } from "redux/actions/shape_shift";
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
import ShiftMarketInfo from "./market_info";
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
type ShapeShiftFormErrors = {
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
returnAddress?: string,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
};
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
type Props = {
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
values: ShapeShiftFormValues,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
errors: ShapeShiftFormErrors,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
touched: boolean,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
handleChange: Event => any,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
handleBlur: Event => any,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
handleSubmit: Event => any,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
isSubmitting: boolean,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
shiftSupportedCoins: Array<string>,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
originCoin: string,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
updating: boolean,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
getCoinStats: Dispatch,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
receiveAddress: string,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee: number,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin: string,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax: number,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
shapeShiftRate: number,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
};
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
export default (props: Props) => {
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
const {
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
values,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
errors,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
touched,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
handleChange,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
handleBlur,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
handleSubmit,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
isSubmitting,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
shiftSupportedCoins,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
originCoin,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
updating,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
getCoinStats,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
receiveAddress,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
shapeShiftRate,
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
} = props;
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
return (
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
<form onSubmit={handleSubmit}>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
<div className="form-field">
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
<span>{__("Exchange")} </span>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
<select
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
className="form-field__input form-field__input-select"
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
name="originCoin"
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
onChange={e => {
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
getCoinStats(e.target.value);
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
handleChange(e);
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
}}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
{shiftSupportedCoins.map(coin => (
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
<option key={coin} value={coin}>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
{coin}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
</option>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
))}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
</select>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
<span> {__("for LBC")}</span>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
<div className="shapeshift__tx-info">
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
{!updating &&
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax && (
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
<ShiftMarketInfo
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
originCoin={originCoin}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
shapeShiftRate={shapeShiftRate}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee={originCoinDepositFee}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin={originCoinDepositMin}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax={originCoinDepositMax}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
/>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
)}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
<FormRow
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
type="text"
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
name="returnAddress"
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
placeholder={getExampleAddress(originCoin)}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
label={__("Return address")}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
onChange={handleChange}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
onBlur={handleBlur}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
value={values.returnAddress}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
errorMessage={errors.returnAddress}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
hasError={touched.returnAddress && !!errors.returnAddress}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
/>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
<span className="help">
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
<span>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
({__("optional but recommended")}) {__("We will return your")}{" "}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
{originCoin}{" "}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
{__("to this address if the transaction doesn't go through.")}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
</span>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
</span>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
<div className="card__actions card__actions--only-vertical">
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
<Submit
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
label={__("Begin Conversion")}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
disabled={isSubmitting || !!Object.keys(errors).length}
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
/>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
</form>
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
);
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
||||
};
|
||||
Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic Yeah definitely not a fan of the current input styling. I was thinking this was fine for now since the PR is getting bigger and bigger. But might as well do it now and avoid more tech debt. I will update the generic `input` style to be more inline with the wunderbar
I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this: Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle. For this element ( If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change. Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann I think this should stay as just classes with regular html elements. I can make my case more tomorrow, but my main idea is this:
Shared components are good for elements that can very a lot, but only with small differences. Buttons have many different possible styles (different background colors, borders, labels, etc). A lot of different variation, but the component is generally the same, a box with some text in the middle.
For this element (`select`), there can be many different ways to present it. I think it definitely makes sense to use a shared components if there might be inline errors or something we want to keep the same across the app, but there won't be any errors on this `select` element. I just want the styling with text on the left and right, which is very easy just by using regular html elements (and the same classes that the `FormRow` component uses).
If we start building out the shared components so much that they meet every possible use case, they can quickly become huge, un-maintainable files that can be terrible pain to update/change.
Would love to hear everyone else's thoughts. @liamcardenas @IGassmann
Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that Yes we can display the actual rate. I'll add that
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
|
|||
// @flow
|
||||
import React from "react";
|
||||
|
||||
type Props = {
|
||||
shapeShiftRate: ?number,
|
||||
originCoin: ?string,
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee: ?number,
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax: ?number,
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin: ?string,
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
export default (props: Props) => {
|
||||
const {
|
||||
shapeShiftRate,
|
||||
originCoin,
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee,
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax,
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin,
|
||||
} = props;
|
||||
|
||||
return (
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
<span className="help">
|
||||
{__("Receive")} {shapeShiftRate} LBC
|
||||
{" / "}
|
||||
{"1"} {originCoin} {__("less")} {originCoinDepositFee} LBC {__("fee")}.
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
{__("Exchange max")}: {originCoinDepositMax} {originCoin}
|
||||
<br />
|
||||
{__("Exchange min")}: {originCoinDepositMin} {originCoin}
|
||||
</span>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
);
|
||||
};
|
150
src/renderer/js/component/shapeShift/view.jsx
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,150 @@
|
|||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
// @flow
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
import * as React from "react";
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
import { shell } from "electron";
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
import { Formik } from "formik";
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
import classnames from "classnames";
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
import * as statuses from "constants/shape_shift";
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
import { validateShapeShiftForm } from "util/shape_shift";
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
import Link from "component/link";
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
import Spinner from "component/common/spinner";
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
import { BusyMessage } from "component/common";
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
import ShapeShiftForm from "./internal/form";
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
import ActiveShapeShift from "./internal/active-shift";
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
import type { ShapeShiftState } from "redux/reducers/shape_shift";
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
import type { Dispatch, ShapeShiftFormValues } from "redux/actions/shape_shift";
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
type Props = {
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shapeShift: ShapeShiftState,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
getCoinStats: Dispatch,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
createShapeShift: Dispatch,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
clearShapeShift: Dispatch,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
getActiveShift: Dispatch,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
doShowSnackBar: Dispatch,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shapeShiftInit: Dispatch,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
receiveAddress: string,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
};
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
class ShapeShift extends React.PureComponent<Props> {
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
componentDidMount() {
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
const {
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shapeShiftInit,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shapeShift: { hasActiveShift, shiftSupportedCoins },
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
} = this.props;
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
if (!hasActiveShift && !shiftSupportedCoins.length) {
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
// calls shapeshift to see list of supported coins for shifting
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shapeShiftInit();
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
render() {
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
const {
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
getCoinStats,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
receiveAddress,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
createShapeShift,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shapeShift,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
clearShapeShift,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
getActiveShift,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
doShowSnackBar,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
} = this.props;
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
const {
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
loading,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
updating,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
error,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shiftSupportedCoins,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
hasActiveShift,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
originCoin,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
// ShapeShift response values
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shiftDepositAddress,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shiftReturnAddress,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shiftCoinType,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shiftOrderId,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shiftState,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shapeShiftRate,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
} = shapeShift;
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
const initialFormValues: ShapeShiftFormValues = {
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
receiveAddress,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
originCoin: "BTC",
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
returnAddress: "",
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
};
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
return (
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
// add the "shapeshift__intital-wrapper class so we can avoid content jumping once everything loads"
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
// it just gives the section a min-height equal to the height of the content when the form is rendered
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
// if the markup below changes for the initial render (form.jsx) there will be content jumping
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
// the styling in shapeshift.scss will need to be updated to the correct min-height
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
<section
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
className={classnames("card shapeshift__wrapper", {
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
"shapeshift__initial-wrapper": loading,
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
})}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
>
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
<div className="card__title-primary">
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
<h3>{__("Convert Crypto to LBC")}</h3>
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
<p className="help">
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
{__("Powered by ShapeShift. Read our FAQ")}{" "}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
<Link href="https://lbry.io/faq/shapeshift">{__("here")}</Link>.
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
{hasActiveShift &&
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shiftState !== "complete" && (
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
<span>{__("This will update automatically.")}</span>
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
)}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
<div className="card__content shapeshift__content">
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
{error && <div className="form-field__error">{error}</div>}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
{loading && <Spinner dark />}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
{!loading &&
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
!hasActiveShift &&
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
!!shiftSupportedCoins.length && (
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
<Formik
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
onSubmit={createShapeShift}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
validate={validateShapeShiftForm}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
initialValues={initialFormValues}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
render={formProps => (
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
<ShapeShiftForm
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
{...formProps}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
updating={updating}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
originCoin={originCoin}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shiftSupportedCoins={shiftSupportedCoins}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
getCoinStats={getCoinStats}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
receiveAddress={receiveAddress}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax={originCoinDepositMax}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin={originCoinDepositMin}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee={originCoinDepositFee}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shapeShiftRate={shapeShiftRate}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
updating={updating}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
/>
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
)}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
/>
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
)}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
{hasActiveShift && (
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
<ActiveShapeShift
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
getActiveShift={getActiveShift}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shiftCoinType={shiftCoinType}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shiftReturnAddress={shiftReturnAddress}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shiftDepositAddress={shiftDepositAddress}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax={originCoinDepositMax}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shiftOrderId={shiftOrderId}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shiftState={shiftState}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
clearShapeShift={clearShapeShift}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
doShowSnackBar={doShowSnackBar}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax={originCoinDepositMax}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin={originCoinDepositMin}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee={originCoinDepositFee}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
shapeShiftRate={shapeShiftRate}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
updating={updating}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
/>
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
)}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
</section>
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
);
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
}
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
||||
export default ShapeShift;
|
||||
I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up I was thinking this would be a link to the FAQ Tom writes up
|
|
@ -1,9 +1,10 @@
|
|||
import React from "react";
|
||||
import Spinner from "component/common/spinner";
|
||||
|
||||
const LoadingScreen = ({ status, spinner = true }) => (
|
||||
<div className="video__loading-screen">
|
||||
<div>
|
||||
{spinner && <div className="video__loading-spinner" />}
|
||||
{spinner && <Spinner />}
|
||||
|
||||
<div className="video__loading-status">{status}</div>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
|
|||
import React from "react";
|
||||
import Link from "component/link";
|
||||
import { Address } from "component/common";
|
||||
import Address from "component/address";
|
||||
|
||||
class WalletAddress extends React.PureComponent {
|
||||
componentWillMount() {
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -144,3 +144,18 @@ export const FETCH_REWARD_CONTENT_COMPLETED = "FETCH_REWARD_CONTENT_COMPLETED";
|
|||
//Language
|
||||
export const DOWNLOAD_LANGUAGE_SUCCEEDED = "DOWNLOAD_LANGUAGE_SUCCEEDED";
|
||||
export const DOWNLOAD_LANGUAGE_FAILED = "DOWNLOAD_LANGUAGE_FAILED";
|
||||
|
||||
// ShapeShift
|
||||
export const GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_START = "GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_START";
|
||||
export const GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_SUCCESS = "GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_SUCCESS";
|
||||
export const GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_FAIL = "GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_FAIL";
|
||||
export const GET_COIN_STATS_START = "GET_COIN_STATS_START";
|
||||
export const GET_COIN_STATS_SUCCESS = "GET_COIN_STATS_SUCCESS";
|
||||
export const GET_COIN_STATS_FAIL = "GET_COIN_STATS_FAIL";
|
||||
export const PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_START = "PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_START";
|
||||
export const PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_SUCCESS = "PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_SUCCESS";
|
||||
export const PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_FAIL = "PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_FAIL";
|
||||
export const GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_START = "GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_START";
|
||||
export const GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_SUCCESS = "GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_SUCCESS";
|
||||
export const GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_FAIL = "GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_FAIL";
|
||||
export const CLEAR_SHAPE_SHIFT = "CLEAR_SHAPE_SHIFT";
|
||||
|
|
3
src/renderer/js/constants/shape_shift.js
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
|
|||
export const NO_DEPOSITS = "no_deposits";
|
||||
export const RECEIVED = "received";
|
||||
export const COMPLETE = "complete";
|
|
@ -2,15 +2,17 @@ import React from "react";
|
|||
import SubHeader from "component/subHeader";
|
||||
import Link from "component/link";
|
||||
import WalletAddress from "component/walletAddress";
|
||||
import ShapeShift from "component/shapeShift";
|
||||
|
||||
const ReceiveCreditsPage = props => {
|
||||
return (
|
||||
<main className="main--single-column">
|
||||
<SubHeader />
|
||||
<WalletAddress />
|
||||
<ShapeShift />
|
||||
<section className="card">
|
||||
<div className="card__title-primary">
|
||||
<h3>{__("Where To Find Credits")}</h3>
|
||||
<h3>{__("More ways to get LBRY Credits")}</h3>
|
||||
</div>
|
||||
<div className="card__content">
|
||||
<p>
|
||||
|
|
137
src/renderer/js/redux/actions/shape_shift.js
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,137 @@
|
|||
whoops. added whoops. added
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
// @flow
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
import Promise from "bluebird";
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
import * as types from "constants/action_types";
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
import { coinRegexPatterns } from "util/shape_shift";
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
import type {
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
GetSupportedCoinsSuccess,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
GetCoinStatsStart,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
GetCoinStatsSuccess,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
GetCoinStatsFail,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
PrepareShapeShiftSuccess,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
PrepareShapeShiftFail,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
GetActiveShiftSuccess,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
GetActiveShiftFail,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
} from "redux/reducers/shape_shift";
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
import type { FormikActions } from "types/common";
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
// use promise chains instead of callbacks for shapeshift api
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
const shapeShift = Promise.promisifyAll(require("shapeshift.io"));
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
// All ShapeShift actions
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
// Action types defined in the reducer will contain some payload
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
export type Action =
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
| { type: types.GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_START }
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
I get that you are defining these here so as not to create extra boilerplate work, but I wonder if all of the types should be defined in the same place? I think this is probably best, but I just wanted to throw this question out there in case anyone has any thoughts on it I get that you are defining these here so as not to create extra boilerplate work, but I wonder if all of the types should be defined in the same place? I think this is probably best, but I just wanted to throw this question out there in case anyone has any thoughts on it
My proposed design is:
My biggest question about this design is whether there should only be one action type, or whether we should use subtypes for each possible action and payload signature. My proposed design is:
1) Add a `types` folder inside of `js`. `types` will eventually swallow `constants`.
2) An `Action` type is defined in `Action.js` inside of this folder.
3) This file also includes all action constant definitions.
4) The `Action` type explicitly enumerates all possible action type values.
My biggest question about this design is whether there should only be one action type, or whether we should use subtypes for each possible action and payload signature.
Possibly better to discuss this here https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/810 Possibly better to discuss this here https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app/issues/810
Let's not block this PR on getting action definition exactly correct. Let's not block this PR on getting action definition exactly correct.
|
||||
| { type: types.GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_FAIL }
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
| GetSupportedCoinsSuccess
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
| GetCoinStatsStart
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
| { type: types.GET_COIN_STATS_START }
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
| GetCoinStatsFail
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
| GetCoinStatsSuccess
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
| { type: types.PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_START }
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
| PrepareShapeShiftFail
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
| PrepareShapeShiftSuccess
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
| { type: types.GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_START }
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
| GetActiveShiftFail
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
| GetActiveShiftSuccess;
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
// Basic thunk types
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
// It would be nice to import these from types/common
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
// Not sure how that would work since they rely on the Action type
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
type PromiseAction = Promise<Action>;
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
can you make these generic and move them to a different folder as you alluded to in the comment? I also am not a huge fan of using the any type here but for now I think this is good. i.e.
can you make these generic and move them to a different folder as you alluded to in the comment? I also am not a huge fan of using the any type here but for now I think this is good.
i.e.
```type PromiseAction<T> = Promise<T>;
type ThunkAction<T> = (dispatch: Dispatch<T>) => any;
export type Dispatch<T> = (
action: T | ThunkAction<T> | PromiseAction<T> | Array<T>
) => any;
I don't want you to get bogged down with this if for some reason its really difficult I don't want you to get bogged down with this if for some reason its really difficult
|
||||
type ThunkAction = (dispatch: Dispatch) => any;
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
export type Dispatch = (
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
action: Action | ThunkAction | PromiseAction | Array<Action>
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
) => any;
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
// ShapeShift form values
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
export type ShapeShiftFormValues = {
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
originCoin: string,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
returnAddress: ?string,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
receiveAddress: string,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
};
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
export const shapeShiftInit = () => (dispatch: Dispatch): ThunkAction => {
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
dispatch({ type: types.GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_START });
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
return shapeShift
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.coinsAsync()
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.then(coinData => {
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
let supportedCoins = [];
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
Object.keys(coinData).forEach(symbol => {
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
if (coinData[symbol].status === "available") {
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
supportedCoins.push(coinData[symbol]);
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
}
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
});
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
// only use larger coins with client side validation
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
supportedCoins = supportedCoins
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.filter(coin => coinRegexPatterns[coin.symbol])
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.map(coin => coin.symbol);
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
dispatch({
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
type: types.GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_SUCCESS,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
data: supportedCoins,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
});
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
dispatch(getCoinStats(supportedCoins[0]));
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
})
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.catch(err =>
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
dispatch({ type: types.GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_FAIL, data: err })
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
);
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
};
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
export const getCoinStats = (coin: string) => (
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
dispatch: Dispatch
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
): ThunkAction => {
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
const pair = `${coin.toLowerCase()}_lbc`;
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
dispatch({ type: types.GET_COIN_STATS_START, data: coin });
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
return shapeShift
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.marketInfoAsync(pair)
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.then(marketInfo =>
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
dispatch({ type: types.GET_COIN_STATS_SUCCESS, data: marketInfo })
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
)
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.catch(err => dispatch({ type: types.GET_COIN_STATS_FAIL, data: err }));
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
};
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
export const createShapeShift = (
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
values: ShapeShiftFormValues,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
actions: FormikActions
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
) => (dispatch: Dispatch): ThunkAction => {
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
const {
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
originCoin,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
returnAddress,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
receiveAddress: withdrawalAddress,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
} = values;
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
const pair = `${originCoin.toLowerCase()}_lbc`;
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
const options = {
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
returnAddress: returnAddress,
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
};
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
dispatch({ type: types.PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_START });
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
return shapeShift
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.shiftAsync(withdrawalAddress, pair, options)
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.then(res =>
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
dispatch({ type: types.PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_SUCCESS, data: res })
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
)
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.catch(err => {
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
dispatch({ type: types.PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_FAIL, data: err });
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
// for formik to stop the submit
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
actions.setSubmitting(false);
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
});
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
};
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
export const getActiveShift = (depositAddress: string) => (
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
dispatch: Dispatch
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
): ThunkAction => {
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
dispatch({ type: types.GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_START });
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
return shapeShift
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.statusAsync(depositAddress)
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.then(res => dispatch({ type: types.GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_SUCCESS, data: res }))
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
.catch(err => dispatch({ type: types.GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_FAIL, data: err }));
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
};
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
export const clearShapeShift = () => (dispatch: Dispatch): Action =>
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
||||
dispatch({ type: types.CLEAR_SHAPE_SHIFT });
|
||||
whoops. added whoops. added
|
245
src/renderer/js/redux/reducers/shape_shift.js
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,245 @@
|
|||
// @flow
|
||||
import { handleActions } from "util/redux-utils";
|
||||
import * as actions from "constants/action_types";
|
||||
import * as statuses from "constants/shape_shift";
|
||||
|
||||
export type ShapeShiftState = {
|
||||
loading: boolean,
|
||||
updating: boolean,
|
||||
shiftSupportedCoins: Array<string>,
|
||||
hasActiveShift: boolean,
|
||||
originCoin: ?string,
|
||||
error: ?string,
|
||||
shiftDepositAddress: ?string,
|
||||
shiftReturnAddress: ?string,
|
||||
shiftCoinType: ?string,
|
||||
shiftOrderId: ?string,
|
||||
shiftState: ?string,
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax: ?number,
|
||||
// originCoinDepositMin is a string because we need to convert it from scientifc notation
|
||||
// it will usually be something like 0.00000001 coins
|
||||
// using Number(x) or parseInt(x) will either change it back to scientific notation or round to zero
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin: ?string,
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee: ?number,
|
||||
shapeShiftRate: ?number,
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
// All ShapeShift actions that will have some payload
|
||||
export type GetSupportedCoinsSuccess = {
|
||||
type: actions.GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_SUCCESS,
|
||||
data: Array<string>,
|
||||
};
|
||||
export type GetCoinStatsStart = {
|
||||
type: actions.GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_SUCCESS,
|
||||
data: string,
|
||||
};
|
||||
export type GetCoinStatsSuccess = {
|
||||
type: actions.GET_COIN_STATS_SUCCESS,
|
||||
data: ShapeShiftMarketInfo,
|
||||
};
|
||||
export type GetCoinStatsFail = {
|
||||
type: actions.GET_COIN_STATS_FAIL,
|
||||
data: string,
|
||||
};
|
||||
export type PrepareShapeShiftSuccess = {
|
||||
type: actions.PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_SUCCESS,
|
||||
data: ActiveShiftInfo,
|
||||
};
|
||||
export type PrepareShapeShiftFail = {
|
||||
type: actions.PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_FAIL,
|
||||
data: ShapeShiftErrorResponse,
|
||||
};
|
||||
export type GetActiveShiftSuccess = {
|
||||
type: actions.GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_SUCCESS,
|
||||
data: string,
|
||||
};
|
||||
export type GetActiveShiftFail = {
|
||||
type: actions.GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_FAIL,
|
||||
data: ShapeShiftErrorResponse,
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
// ShapeShift sub-types
|
||||
// Defined for actions that contain an object in the payload
|
||||
type ShapeShiftMarketInfo = {
|
||||
limit: number,
|
||||
minimum: number,
|
||||
minerFee: number,
|
||||
rate: number,
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
type ActiveShiftInfo = {
|
||||
deposit: string,
|
||||
depositType: string,
|
||||
returnAddress: string,
|
||||
orderId: string,
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
type ShapeShiftErrorResponse = {
|
||||
message: string,
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
const defaultState: ShapeShiftState = {
|
||||
loading: true,
|
||||
updating: false,
|
||||
shiftSupportedCoins: [],
|
||||
hasActiveShift: false,
|
||||
originCoin: undefined,
|
||||
error: undefined,
|
||||
shiftDepositAddress: undefined, // shapeshift address to send your coins to
|
||||
shiftReturnAddress: undefined,
|
||||
shiftCoinType: undefined,
|
||||
shiftOrderId: undefined,
|
||||
shiftState: undefined,
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax: undefined,
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin: undefined,
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee: undefined,
|
||||
shapeShiftRate: undefined,
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
export default handleActions(
|
||||
{
|
||||
[actions.GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_START]: (
|
||||
state: ShapeShiftState
|
||||
): ShapeShiftState => ({
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
loading: true,
|
||||
error: undefined,
|
||||
}),
|
||||
[actions.GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_SUCCESS]: (
|
||||
state: ShapeShiftState,
|
||||
action: GetSupportedCoinsSuccess
|
||||
): ShapeShiftState => {
|
||||
const shiftSupportedCoins = action.data;
|
||||
return {
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
error: undefined,
|
||||
shiftSupportedCoins,
|
||||
};
|
||||
},
|
||||
[actions.GET_SUPPORTED_COINS_FAIL]: (
|
||||
state: ShapeShiftState
|
||||
): ShapeShiftState => ({
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
loading: false,
|
||||
error: "Error getting available coins",
|
||||
}),
|
||||
|
||||
[actions.GET_COIN_STATS_START]: (
|
||||
state: ShapeShiftState,
|
||||
action: GetCoinStatsStart
|
||||
): ShapeShiftState => {
|
||||
const coin = action.data;
|
||||
return {
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
updating: true,
|
||||
originCoin: coin,
|
||||
};
|
||||
},
|
||||
[actions.GET_COIN_STATS_SUCCESS]: (
|
||||
state: ShapeShiftState,
|
||||
action: GetCoinStatsSuccess
|
||||
): ShapeShiftState => {
|
||||
const marketInfo: ShapeShiftMarketInfo = action.data;
|
||||
|
||||
return {
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
loading: false,
|
||||
updating: false,
|
||||
originCoinDepositMax: marketInfo.limit,
|
||||
// this will come in scientific notation
|
||||
// toFixed shows the real number, then regex to remove trailing zeros
|
||||
originCoinDepositMin: marketInfo.minimum
|
||||
.toFixed(10)
|
||||
.replace(/\.?0+$/, ""),
|
||||
originCoinDepositFee: marketInfo.minerFee,
|
||||
shapeShiftRate: marketInfo.rate,
|
||||
};
|
||||
},
|
||||
[actions.GET_COIN_STATS_FAIL]: (
|
||||
state: ShapeShiftState,
|
||||
action: GetCoinStatsFail
|
||||
): ShapeShiftState => {
|
||||
const error = action.data;
|
||||
return {
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
loading: false,
|
||||
error,
|
||||
};
|
||||
},
|
||||
|
||||
[actions.PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_START]: (
|
||||
state: ShapeShiftState
|
||||
): ShapeShiftState => ({
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
error: undefined,
|
||||
}),
|
||||
[actions.PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_SUCCESS]: (
|
||||
state: ShapeShiftState,
|
||||
action: PrepareShapeShiftSuccess
|
||||
) => {
|
||||
const activeShiftInfo: ActiveShiftInfo = action.data;
|
||||
return {
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
hasActiveShift: true,
|
||||
shiftDepositAddress: activeShiftInfo.deposit,
|
||||
shiftCoinType: activeShiftInfo.depositType,
|
||||
shiftReturnAddress: activeShiftInfo.returnAddress,
|
||||
shiftOrderId: activeShiftInfo.orderId,
|
||||
shiftState: statuses.NO_DEPOSITS,
|
||||
};
|
||||
},
|
||||
[actions.PREPARE_SHAPE_SHIFT_FAIL]: (
|
||||
state: ShapeShiftState,
|
||||
action: PrepareShapeShiftFail
|
||||
) => {
|
||||
const error: ShapeShiftErrorResponse = action.data;
|
||||
return {
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
error: error.message,
|
||||
};
|
||||
},
|
||||
|
||||
[actions.CLEAR_SHAPE_SHIFT]: (state: ShapeShiftState): ShapeShiftState => ({
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
loading: false,
|
||||
updating: false,
|
||||
hasActiveShift: false,
|
||||
shiftDepositAddress: undefined,
|
||||
shiftReturnAddress: undefined,
|
||||
shiftCoinType: undefined,
|
||||
shiftOrderId: undefined,
|
||||
originCoin: state.shiftSupportedCoins[0],
|
||||
}),
|
||||
|
||||
[actions.GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_START]: (
|
||||
state: ShapeShiftState
|
||||
): ShapeShiftState => ({
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
error: undefined,
|
||||
updating: true,
|
||||
}),
|
||||
[actions.GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_SUCCESS]: (
|
||||
state: ShapeShiftState,
|
||||
action: GetActiveShiftSuccess
|
||||
): ShapeShiftState => {
|
||||
const status = action.data;
|
||||
return {
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
updating: false,
|
||||
shiftState: status,
|
||||
};
|
||||
},
|
||||
[actions.GET_ACTIVE_SHIFT_FAIL]: (
|
||||
state: ShapeShiftState,
|
||||
action: GetActiveShiftFail
|
||||
): ShapeShiftState => {
|
||||
const error: ShapeShiftErrorResponse = action.data;
|
||||
return {
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
updating: false,
|
||||
error: error.message,
|
||||
};
|
||||
},
|
||||
},
|
||||
defaultState
|
||||
);
|
|
@ -44,8 +44,8 @@ export const selectHeaderLinks = createSelector(selectCurrentPage, page => {
|
|||
return {
|
||||
wallet: __("Overview"),
|
||||
history: __("History"),
|
||||
send: __("Send"),
|
||||
receive: __("Receive"),
|
||||
send: __("Send Credits"),
|
||||
receive: __("Get Credits"),
|
||||
rewards: __("Rewards"),
|
||||
invite: __("Invites"),
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
@ -78,9 +78,9 @@ export const selectPageTitle = createSelector(
|
|||
case "wallet":
|
||||
return __("Wallet");
|
||||
case "send":
|
||||
return __("Send Credits");
|
||||
return __("Send LBRY Credits");
|
||||
case "receive":
|
||||
return __("Wallet Address");
|
||||
return __("Get LBRY Credits");
|
||||
case "backup":
|
||||
return __("Backup Your Wallet");
|
||||
case "rewards":
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ export const selectWunderBarIcon = createSelector(
|
|||
return "icon-envelope-open";
|
||||
case "address":
|
||||
case "receive":
|
||||
return "icon-address-book";
|
||||
return "icon-credit-card";
|
||||
case "wallet":
|
||||
case "backup":
|
||||
return "icon-bank";
|
||||
|
|
7
src/renderer/js/redux/selectors/shape_shift.js
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
|
|||
import { createSelector } from "reselect";
|
||||
|
||||
const _selectState = state => state.shapeShift;
|
||||
|
||||
export const selectShapeShift = createSelector(_selectState, state => ({
|
||||
...state,
|
||||
}));
|
|
@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ import searchReducer from "redux/reducers/search";
|
|||
import settingsReducer from "redux/reducers/settings";
|
||||
import userReducer from "redux/reducers/user";
|
||||
import walletReducer from "redux/reducers/wallet";
|
||||
import shapeShiftReducer from "redux/reducers/shape_shift";
|
||||
import { persistStore, autoRehydrate } from "redux-persist";
|
||||
import createCompressor from "redux-persist-transform-compress";
|
||||
import createFilter from "redux-persist-transform-filter";
|
||||
|
@ -67,6 +68,7 @@ const reducers = redux.combineReducers({
|
|||
settings: settingsReducer,
|
||||
wallet: walletReducer,
|
||||
user: userReducer,
|
||||
shapeShift: shapeShiftReducer,
|
||||
});
|
||||
|
||||
const bulkThunk = createBulkThunkMiddleware();
|
||||
|
|
3
src/renderer/js/types/common.js
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
|
|||
export type FormikActions = {
|
||||
setSubmitting: boolean => mixed,
|
||||
};
|
|
@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
|
|||
// util for creating reducers
|
||||
// based off of redux-actions
|
||||
// https://redux-actions.js.org/docs/api/handleAction.html#handleactions
|
||||
|
||||
export const handleActions = (actionMap, defaultState) => {
|
||||
return (state = defaultState, action) => {
|
||||
const handler = actionMap[action.type];
|
||||
|
|
50
src/renderer/js/util/shape_shift.js
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,50 @@
|
|||
// these don't need to be exact
|
||||
// shapeshift does a more thourough check on validity
|
||||
// just general matches to prevent unneccesary api calls
|
||||
export const coinRegexPatterns = {
|
||||
BTC: /^[13][a-km-zA-HJ-NP-Z1-9]{25,34}$/,
|
||||
BCH: /^[13][a-km-zA-HJ-NP-Z1-9]{25,34}$/,
|
||||
ETH: /^(0x)?[0-9a-fA-F]{40}$/,
|
||||
DASH: /^X([0-9a-zA-Z]){33}/,
|
||||
LTC: /^L[a-zA-Z0-9]{26,33}$/,
|
||||
XMR: /^4[0-9ABCDEFGHJKLMNPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijkmnopqrstuvwxyz]{94}$/,
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
const validateAddress = (coinType, address) => {
|
||||
if (!coinType || !address) return false;
|
||||
|
||||
const coinRegex = coinRegexPatterns[coinType.toUpperCase()];
|
||||
if (!coinRegex) return false;
|
||||
|
||||
return coinRegex.test(address);
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
export const validateShapeShiftForm = (vals, props) => {
|
||||
let errors = {};
|
||||
|
||||
if (!vals.returnAddress) {
|
||||
return errors;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
const isValidAddress = validateAddress(vals.originCoin, vals.returnAddress);
|
||||
|
||||
if (!isValidAddress) {
|
||||
errors.returnAddress = `Enter a valid ${vals.originCoin} address`;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
return errors;
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
const exampleCoinAddresses = {
|
||||
BTC: "1745oPaHeW7Fmpb1fUKTtasYfxr4zu9bwq",
|
||||
BCH: "1745oPaHeW7Fmpb1fUKTtasYfxr4zu9bwq",
|
||||
ETH: "0x8507cA6a274123fC8f80d929AF9D83602bC4e8cC",
|
||||
DASH: "XedBP7vLPFXbS3URjrH2Z57Fg9SWftBmQ6",
|
||||
LTC: "LgZivMvFMTDoqcA5weCQ2QrmRp7pa56bBk",
|
||||
XMR:
|
||||
"466XMeJEcowYGx7RzUJj3VDWBZgRWErVQQX6tHYbsacS5QF6v3tidE6LZZnTJgzeEh6bKEEJ6GC9jHirrUKvJwVKVj9e7jm",
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
export const getExampleAddress = coin => {
|
||||
return exampleCoinAddresses[coin];
|
||||
};
|
|
@ -22,10 +22,14 @@
|
|||
},
|
||||
"homepage": "https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-app",
|
||||
"dependencies": {
|
||||
"bluebird": "^3.5.1",
|
||||
"classnames": "^2.2.5",
|
||||
"formik": "^0.10.4",
|
||||
"from2": "^2.3.0",
|
||||
"jshashes": "^1.0.7",
|
||||
"localforage": "^1.5.0",
|
||||
"node-sass": "^4.5.3",
|
||||
"qrcode.react": "^0.7.2",
|
||||
"rc-progress": "^2.0.6",
|
||||
"react": "^16.2.0",
|
||||
"react-dom": "^16.2.0",
|
||||
|
@ -43,6 +47,7 @@
|
|||
"redux-thunk": "^2.2.0",
|
||||
"render-media": "^2.10.0",
|
||||
"reselect": "^3.0.0",
|
||||
"shapeshift.io": "^1.3.1",
|
||||
"y18n": "^3.2.1"
|
||||
},
|
||||
"devDependencies": {
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -34,6 +34,11 @@ body
|
|||
color: var(--color-meta-light);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
.credit-amount--bold
|
||||
is this used elsewhere in the app or is it just for shapeshift? I don't have a criticism here, I'm just wondering what we decided about using reusable vs case specific classes? is this used elsewhere in the app or is it just for shapeshift? I don't have a criticism here, I'm just wondering what we decided about using reusable vs case specific classes?
|
||||
{
|
||||
font-weight: 700;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
#main-content
|
||||
{
|
||||
margin: auto;
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -26,4 +26,6 @@
|
|||
@import "component/_divider.scss";
|
||||
@import "component/_checkbox.scss";
|
||||
@import "component/_radio.scss";
|
||||
@import "component/_shapeshift.scss";
|
||||
@import "component/_spinner.scss";
|
||||
@import "page/_show.scss";
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -98,4 +98,4 @@ $button-focus-shift: 12%;
|
|||
.button--submit {
|
||||
font-family: inherit;
|
||||
line-height: 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
|
@ -26,6 +26,7 @@
|
|||
.card__actions {
|
||||
padding: 0 var(--card-padding);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
.card--small {
|
||||
.card__title-primary,
|
||||
.card__title-identity,
|
||||
|
@ -50,7 +51,7 @@
|
|||
.card__actions {
|
||||
margin-top: var(--card-margin);
|
||||
margin-bottom: var(--card-margin);
|
||||
user-select: none;
|
||||
user-select: none;
|
||||
|
||||
}
|
||||
.card__actions--bottom {
|
||||
|
@ -72,6 +73,18 @@
|
|||
margin-bottom: var(--card-margin);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
.card__actions--only-vertical {
|
||||
margin-left: 0;
|
||||
margin-right: 0;
|
||||
padding-left: 0;
|
||||
padding-right: 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
.card__content--extra-vertical-space {
|
||||
margin: $spacing-vertical 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
$font-size-subtext-multiple: 0.82;
|
||||
.card__subtext {
|
||||
color: var(--color-meta-light);
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -56,6 +56,11 @@
|
|||
padding-left: 5px;
|
||||
padding-right: 5px;
|
||||
width: 100%;
|
||||
font-family: "Consolas", "Lucida Console", "Adobe Source Code Pro", monospace;
|
||||
|
||||
&.input-copyable--with-copy-btn {
|
||||
width: 85%;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
input[readonly] {
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -43,6 +43,8 @@
|
|||
|
||||
.wunderbar--active .icon-search { color: var(--color-primary); }
|
||||
|
||||
// below styles should be inside the common input styling
|
||||
// will come back to this with the redesign - sean
|
||||
.wunderbar__input {
|
||||
background: var(--search-bg);
|
||||
width: 100%;
|
||||
|
|
40
src/renderer/scss/component/_shapeshift.scss
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
|
|||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
// Can't think of a better way to do this
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
// The initial shapeshift form is 311px tall
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
// the .shapeshift__initial-wrapper class is only added when the form is being loaded
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
// Once the form is rendered, there is a very smooth transition because the height doesn't change
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
.shapeshift__wrapper.shapeshift__initial-wrapper {
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
min-height: 346px;
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
}
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
.shapeshift__content {
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
.spinner {
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
margin-top: $spacing-vertical * 3;
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
}
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
}
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
.shapeshift__tx-info {
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
min-height: 55px;
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
We would still need some sort of min height on that unless the heights are the same. I would rather not since this check is usually very quick and you would only see that for a small time before it goes back to the info text. We would still need some sort of min height on that unless the heights are the same. I would rather not since this check is usually very quick and you would only see that for a small time before it goes back to the info text.
|
||||
}
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
.shapeshift__deposit-address-wrapper {
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
display: flex;
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
flex-direction: row;
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
* {
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
align-self: center;
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
}
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
}
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
// this should be pulled out into it's own styling when we add more qr codes
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
.shapeshift__qrcode {
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
// don't use a variable here. adds a white border for easier reading in dark mode
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
// needs to stay the same no matter what theme is present
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
background-color: #fff;
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
padding: 2px;
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
margin-left: 40px;
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
}
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
.shapeshift__link {
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
padding-left: 10px;
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
||||
}
|
||||
Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className? Don't need this class. The success class is just to add the green color on the text. There isn't any styles that only do that, maybe it should be a more generic className?
Yeah... Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered. Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading Yeah...
Can't think of better way to do it. Nothing bad could really happen, at least nothing worse than not having this. If someone changes the form content to be a different height, it will just "jump" to that height after it's rendered. The same thing would happen if we don't have this style, it will "jump" and increase the height when the form is rendered.
Happy to change it if we can think of a better way. I just hate having content jumping when stuff is loading
I'll keep the min-height on I'll keep the min-height on `shapeshift__maxdeposit` to avoid content jumping when we fetch new max limits after the user changes the origin coin
I don't think it's necessary to use the I don't think it's necessary to use the `card-xx` styles for this. It doesn't have anything to do with the `card` style. It's just a small bit of markup that needs some padding. I think ideally we could just use a `s-vertical-padding` helper class or something similar. We can discuss this more along with the `display-xx` helper classes.
👍 👍
`card__content` is the class I'd propose using instead.
👍 👍
|
58
src/renderer/scss/component/_spinner.scss
Normal file
|
@ -0,0 +1,58 @@
|
|||
.spinner {
|
||||
position: relative;
|
||||
width: 11em;
|
||||
height: 11em;
|
||||
margin: 20px auto;
|
||||
font-size: 3px;
|
||||
border-radius: 50%;
|
||||
|
||||
background: linear-gradient(to right, #fff 10%, rgba(255, 255, 255, 0) 50%);
|
||||
animation: spin 1.4s infinite linear;
|
||||
transform: translateZ(0);
|
||||
|
||||
@keyframes spin {
|
||||
from {
|
||||
transform: rotate(0deg);
|
||||
}
|
||||
to {
|
||||
transform: rotate(360deg);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
&:before,
|
||||
&:after {
|
||||
content: '';
|
||||
position: absolute;
|
||||
top: 0;
|
||||
left: 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
&:before {
|
||||
width: 50%;
|
||||
height: 50%;
|
||||
background: #fff;
|
||||
border-radius: 100% 0 0 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
&:after {
|
||||
height: 75%;
|
||||
width: 75%;
|
||||
margin: auto;
|
||||
bottom: 0;
|
||||
right: 0;
|
||||
background: #000;
|
||||
border-radius: 50%;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
.spinner.spinner--dark {
|
||||
background: linear-gradient(to right, var(--button-primary-bg) 10%, var(--color-bg) 50%);
|
||||
|
||||
&:before {
|
||||
background: var(--button-primary-bg);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
&:after {
|
||||
background: var(--color-bg);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
|
@ -46,53 +46,6 @@ video {
|
|||
align-items: center;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
.video__loading-spinner {
|
||||
position: relative;
|
||||
width: 11em;
|
||||
height: 11em;
|
||||
margin: 20px auto;
|
||||
font-size: 3px;
|
||||
border-radius: 50%;
|
||||
|
||||
background: linear-gradient(to right, #ffffff 10%, rgba(255, 255, 255, 0) 50%);
|
||||
animation: spin 1.4s infinite linear;
|
||||
transform: translateZ(0);
|
||||
|
||||
@keyframes spin {
|
||||
from {
|
||||
transform: rotate(0deg);
|
||||
}
|
||||
to {
|
||||
transform: rotate(360deg);
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
&:before,
|
||||
&:after {
|
||||
content: '';
|
||||
position: absolute;
|
||||
top: 0;
|
||||
left: 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
&:before {
|
||||
width: 50%;
|
||||
height: 50%;
|
||||
background: #ffffff;
|
||||
border-radius: 100% 0 0 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
&:after {
|
||||
height: 75%;
|
||||
width: 75%;
|
||||
margin: auto;
|
||||
bottom: 0;
|
||||
right: 0;
|
||||
background: black;
|
||||
border-radius: 50%;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
.video__loading-status {
|
||||
padding-top: 20px;
|
||||
color: white;
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ module.exports = {
|
|||
},
|
||||
resolve: {
|
||||
modules: [appPath, "node_modules"],
|
||||
extensions: [".js", ".jsx", ".css"]
|
||||
extensions: [".js", ".jsx", ".css", ".json"]
|
||||
},
|
||||
This is required because the shapeshift.io module has an import like It causes the bundle to increase quite a bit. I will make a pr to that project to change it to This is required because the shapeshift.io module has an import like `const package = require('../package')`
It causes the bundle to increase quite a bit. I will make a pr to that project to change it to `const package = require('../package.json')` which allow use to remove this
|
||||
module: {
|
||||
rules: [
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -56,9 +56,9 @@ ajv@^4.7.0, ajv@^4.9.1:
|
|||
co "^4.6.0"
|
||||
json-stable-stringify "^1.0.1"
|
||||
|
||||
ajv@^5.0.0, ajv@^5.1.5, ajv@^5.2.3:
|
||||
version "5.4.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/ajv/-/ajv-5.4.0.tgz#32d1cf08dbc80c432f426f12e10b2511f6b46474"
|
||||
ajv@^5.0.0, ajv@^5.1.0, ajv@^5.1.5, ajv@^5.2.3:
|
||||
version "5.5.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/ajv/-/ajv-5.5.0.tgz#eb2840746e9dc48bd5e063a36e3fd400c5eab5a9"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
co "^4.6.0"
|
||||
fast-deep-equal "^1.0.0"
|
||||
|
@ -276,7 +276,11 @@ aws-sign2@~0.6.0:
|
|||
version "0.6.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/aws-sign2/-/aws-sign2-0.6.0.tgz#14342dd38dbcc94d0e5b87d763cd63612c0e794f"
|
||||
|
||||
aws4@^1.2.1:
|
||||
aws-sign2@~0.7.0:
|
||||
version "0.7.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/aws-sign2/-/aws-sign2-0.7.0.tgz#b46e890934a9591f2d2f6f86d7e6a9f1b3fe76a8"
|
||||
|
||||
aws4@^1.2.1, aws4@^1.6.0:
|
||||
version "1.6.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/aws4/-/aws4-1.6.0.tgz#83ef5ca860b2b32e4a0deedee8c771b9db57471e"
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -997,6 +1001,10 @@ block-stream@*:
|
|||
dependencies:
|
||||
inherits "~2.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
bluebird@^3.5.1:
|
||||
version "3.5.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/bluebird/-/bluebird-3.5.1.tgz#d9551f9de98f1fcda1e683d17ee91a0602ee2eb9"
|
||||
|
||||
bn.js@^4.0.0, bn.js@^4.1.0, bn.js@^4.1.1, bn.js@^4.4.0:
|
||||
version "4.11.8"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/bn.js/-/bn.js-4.11.8.tgz#2cde09eb5ee341f484746bb0309b3253b1b1442f"
|
||||
|
@ -1033,6 +1041,18 @@ boom@2.x.x:
|
|||
dependencies:
|
||||
hoek "2.x.x"
|
||||
|
||||
boom@4.x.x:
|
||||
version "4.3.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/boom/-/boom-4.3.1.tgz#4f8a3005cb4a7e3889f749030fd25b96e01d2e31"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
hoek "4.x.x"
|
||||
|
||||
boom@5.x.x:
|
||||
version "5.2.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/boom/-/boom-5.2.0.tgz#5dd9da6ee3a5f302077436290cb717d3f4a54e02"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
hoek "4.x.x"
|
||||
|
||||
brace-expansion@^1.1.7:
|
||||
version "1.1.8"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/brace-expansion/-/brace-expansion-1.1.8.tgz#c07b211c7c952ec1f8efd51a77ef0d1d3990a292"
|
||||
|
@ -1198,8 +1218,8 @@ caniuse-api@^1.5.2:
|
|||
lodash.uniq "^4.5.0"
|
||||
|
||||
caniuse-db@^1.0.30000529, caniuse-db@^1.0.30000634, caniuse-db@^1.0.30000639:
|
||||
version "1.0.30000769"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/caniuse-db/-/caniuse-db-1.0.30000769.tgz#c230b9c1b9e8db3e1c0d858c96e685741b96cc10"
|
||||
version "1.0.30000775"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/caniuse-db/-/caniuse-db-1.0.30000775.tgz#04bccdd0214edf25b97f61a096609f7ad6904333"
|
||||
|
||||
cardinal@^1.0.0:
|
||||
version "1.0.0"
|
||||
|
@ -1376,8 +1396,8 @@ codemirror-spell-checker@*:
|
|||
typo-js "*"
|
||||
|
||||
codemirror@*:
|
||||
version "5.31.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/codemirror/-/codemirror-5.31.0.tgz#ecf3d057eb74174147066bfc7c5f37b4c4e07df2"
|
||||
version "5.32.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/codemirror/-/codemirror-5.32.0.tgz#cb6ff5d8ef36d0b10f031130e2d9ebeee92c902e"
|
||||
|
||||
color-convert@^1.3.0, color-convert@^1.9.0:
|
||||
version "1.9.1"
|
||||
|
@ -1426,8 +1446,8 @@ combined-stream@^1.0.5, combined-stream@~1.0.5:
|
|||
delayed-stream "~1.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
commander@^2.11.0, commander@^2.5.0, commander@^2.9.0:
|
||||
version "2.11.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/commander/-/commander-2.11.0.tgz#157152fd1e7a6c8d98a5b715cf376df928004563"
|
||||
version "2.12.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/commander/-/commander-2.12.2.tgz#0f5946c427ed9ec0d91a46bb9def53e54650e555"
|
||||
|
||||
commondir@^1.0.1:
|
||||
version "1.0.1"
|
||||
|
@ -1525,8 +1545,8 @@ content-type@~1.0.4:
|
|||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/content-type/-/content-type-1.0.4.tgz#e138cc75e040c727b1966fe5e5f8c9aee256fe3b"
|
||||
|
||||
convert-source-map@^1.5.0:
|
||||
version "1.5.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/convert-source-map/-/convert-source-map-1.5.0.tgz#9acd70851c6d5dfdd93d9282e5edf94a03ff46b5"
|
||||
version "1.5.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/convert-source-map/-/convert-source-map-1.5.1.tgz#b8278097b9bc229365de5c62cf5fcaed8b5599e5"
|
||||
|
||||
cookie-signature@1.0.6:
|
||||
version "1.0.6"
|
||||
|
@ -1613,6 +1633,12 @@ cryptiles@2.x.x:
|
|||
dependencies:
|
||||
boom "2.x.x"
|
||||
|
||||
cryptiles@3.x.x:
|
||||
version "3.1.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/cryptiles/-/cryptiles-3.1.2.tgz#a89fbb220f5ce25ec56e8c4aa8a4fd7b5b0d29fe"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
boom "5.x.x"
|
||||
|
||||
crypto-browserify@3.3.0:
|
||||
version "3.3.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/crypto-browserify/-/crypto-browserify-3.3.0.tgz#b9fc75bb4a0ed61dcf1cd5dae96eb30c9c3e506c"
|
||||
|
@ -1849,18 +1875,18 @@ detect-indent@^4.0.0:
|
|||
repeating "^2.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
detect-libc@^1.0.2:
|
||||
version "1.0.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/detect-libc/-/detect-libc-1.0.2.tgz#71ad5d204bf17a6a6ca8f450c61454066ef461e1"
|
||||
version "1.0.3"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/detect-libc/-/detect-libc-1.0.3.tgz#fa137c4bd698edf55cd5cd02ac559f91a4c4ba9b"
|
||||
|
||||
detect-node@^2.0.3:
|
||||
version "2.0.3"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/detect-node/-/detect-node-2.0.3.tgz#a2033c09cc8e158d37748fbde7507832bd6ce127"
|
||||
|
||||
detective@^4.3.1:
|
||||
version "4.5.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/detective/-/detective-4.5.0.tgz#6e5a8c6b26e6c7a254b1c6b6d7490d98ec91edd1"
|
||||
version "4.6.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/detective/-/detective-4.6.0.tgz#d1a793ad0bcc829fa225465061096b7bca040527"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
acorn "^4.0.3"
|
||||
acorn "^5.2.1"
|
||||
defined "^1.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
diffie-hellman@^5.0.0:
|
||||
|
@ -1896,11 +1922,14 @@ doctrine@1.5.0, doctrine@^1.2.2:
|
|||
isarray "^1.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
doctrine@^2.0.0:
|
||||
version "2.0.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/doctrine/-/doctrine-2.0.0.tgz#c73d8d2909d22291e1a007a395804da8b665fe63"
|
||||
version "2.0.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/doctrine/-/doctrine-2.0.2.tgz#68f96ce8efc56cc42651f1faadb4f175273b0075"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
esutils "^2.0.2"
|
||||
isarray "^1.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
dom-walk@^0.1.0:
|
||||
version "0.1.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/dom-walk/-/dom-walk-0.1.1.tgz#672226dc74c8f799ad35307df936aba11acd6018"
|
||||
|
||||
domain-browser@^1.1.1:
|
||||
version "1.1.7"
|
||||
|
@ -2015,8 +2044,8 @@ error-ex@^1.2.0:
|
|||
is-arrayish "^0.2.1"
|
||||
|
||||
es-abstract@^1.7.0:
|
||||
version "1.9.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/es-abstract/-/es-abstract-1.9.0.tgz#690829a07cae36b222e7fd9b75c0d0573eb25227"
|
||||
version "1.10.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/es-abstract/-/es-abstract-1.10.0.tgz#1ecb36c197842a00d8ee4c2dfd8646bb97d60864"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
es-to-primitive "^1.1.1"
|
||||
function-bind "^1.1.1"
|
||||
|
@ -2041,8 +2070,8 @@ es3ify@^0.1.3:
|
|||
through "~2.3.4"
|
||||
|
||||
es5-ext@^0.10.14, es5-ext@^0.10.35, es5-ext@^0.10.9, es5-ext@~0.10.14:
|
||||
version "0.10.35"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/es5-ext/-/es5-ext-0.10.35.tgz#18ee858ce6a3c45c7d79e91c15fcca9ec568494f"
|
||||
version "0.10.37"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/es5-ext/-/es5-ext-0.10.37.tgz#0ee741d148b80069ba27d020393756af257defc3"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
es6-iterator "~2.0.1"
|
||||
es6-symbol "~3.1.1"
|
||||
|
@ -2340,7 +2369,7 @@ expand-range@^1.8.1:
|
|||
dependencies:
|
||||
fill-range "^2.1.0"
|
||||
|
||||
express@^4.13.3:
|
||||
express@^4.16.2:
|
||||
version "4.16.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/express/-/express-4.16.2.tgz#e35c6dfe2d64b7dca0a5cd4f21781be3299e076c"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
|
@ -2375,7 +2404,7 @@ express@^4.13.3:
|
|||
utils-merge "1.0.1"
|
||||
vary "~1.1.2"
|
||||
|
||||
extend@~3.0.0:
|
||||
extend@~3.0.0, extend@~3.0.1:
|
||||
version "3.0.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/extend/-/extend-3.0.1.tgz#a755ea7bc1adfcc5a31ce7e762dbaadc5e636444"
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -2385,10 +2414,14 @@ extglob@^0.3.1:
|
|||
dependencies:
|
||||
is-extglob "^1.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
extsprintf@1.3.0, extsprintf@^1.2.0:
|
||||
extsprintf@1.3.0:
|
||||
version "1.3.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/extsprintf/-/extsprintf-1.3.0.tgz#96918440e3041a7a414f8c52e3c574eb3c3e1e05"
|
||||
|
||||
extsprintf@^1.2.0:
|
||||
version "1.4.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/extsprintf/-/extsprintf-1.4.0.tgz#e2689f8f356fad62cca65a3a91c5df5f9551692f"
|
||||
|
||||
falafel@^1.0.1:
|
||||
version "1.2.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/falafel/-/falafel-1.2.0.tgz#c18d24ef5091174a497f318cd24b026a25cddab4"
|
||||
|
@ -2567,6 +2600,12 @@ flow-typed@^2.2.3:
|
|||
which "^1.2.14"
|
||||
yargs "^4.2.0"
|
||||
|
||||
for-each@^0.3.2:
|
||||
version "0.3.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/for-each/-/for-each-0.3.2.tgz#2c40450b9348e97f281322593ba96704b9abd4d4"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
is-function "~1.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
for-in@^1.0.1:
|
||||
version "1.0.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/for-in/-/for-in-1.0.2.tgz#81068d295a8142ec0ac726c6e2200c30fb6d5e80"
|
||||
|
@ -2593,6 +2632,22 @@ form-data@~2.1.1:
|
|||
combined-stream "^1.0.5"
|
||||
mime-types "^2.1.12"
|
||||
|
||||
form-data@~2.3.1:
|
||||
version "2.3.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/form-data/-/form-data-2.3.1.tgz#6fb94fbd71885306d73d15cc497fe4cc4ecd44bf"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
asynckit "^0.4.0"
|
||||
combined-stream "^1.0.5"
|
||||
mime-types "^2.1.12"
|
||||
|
||||
formik@^0.10.4:
|
||||
version "0.10.5"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/formik/-/formik-0.10.5.tgz#6984d2f22e918c6d2264a3cb86b8582f7277faca"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
lodash.isequal "4.5.0"
|
||||
prop-types "^15.5.10"
|
||||
warning "^3.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
forwarded@~0.1.2:
|
||||
version "0.1.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/forwarded/-/forwarded-0.1.2.tgz#98c23dab1175657b8c0573e8ceccd91b0ff18c84"
|
||||
|
@ -2773,6 +2828,13 @@ glob@^7.0.0, glob@^7.0.3, glob@^7.0.5, glob@^7.1.1, glob@^7.1.2, glob@~7.1.1:
|
|||
once "^1.3.0"
|
||||
path-is-absolute "^1.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
global@~4.3.0:
|
||||
version "4.3.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/global/-/global-4.3.2.tgz#e76989268a6c74c38908b1305b10fc0e394e9d0f"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
min-document "^2.19.0"
|
||||
process "~0.5.1"
|
||||
|
||||
globals@^9.14.0, globals@^9.18.0:
|
||||
version "9.18.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/globals/-/globals-9.18.0.tgz#aa3896b3e69b487f17e31ed2143d69a8e30c2d8a"
|
||||
|
@ -2847,6 +2909,10 @@ har-schema@^1.0.5:
|
|||
version "1.0.5"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/har-schema/-/har-schema-1.0.5.tgz#d263135f43307c02c602afc8fe95970c0151369e"
|
||||
|
||||
har-schema@^2.0.0:
|
||||
version "2.0.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/har-schema/-/har-schema-2.0.0.tgz#a94c2224ebcac04782a0d9035521f24735b7ec92"
|
||||
|
||||
har-validator@~2.0.6:
|
||||
version "2.0.6"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/har-validator/-/har-validator-2.0.6.tgz#cdcbc08188265ad119b6a5a7c8ab70eecfb5d27d"
|
||||
|
@ -2863,6 +2929,13 @@ har-validator@~4.2.1:
|
|||
ajv "^4.9.1"
|
||||
har-schema "^1.0.5"
|
||||
|
||||
har-validator@~5.0.3:
|
||||
version "5.0.3"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/har-validator/-/har-validator-5.0.3.tgz#ba402c266194f15956ef15e0fcf242993f6a7dfd"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
ajv "^5.1.0"
|
||||
har-schema "^2.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
has-ansi@^2.0.0:
|
||||
version "2.0.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/has-ansi/-/has-ansi-2.0.0.tgz#34f5049ce1ecdf2b0649af3ef24e45ed35416d91"
|
||||
|
@ -2926,6 +2999,15 @@ hawk@3.1.3, hawk@~3.1.3:
|
|||
hoek "2.x.x"
|
||||
sntp "1.x.x"
|
||||
|
||||
hawk@~6.0.2:
|
||||
version "6.0.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/hawk/-/hawk-6.0.2.tgz#af4d914eb065f9b5ce4d9d11c1cb2126eecc3038"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
boom "4.x.x"
|
||||
cryptiles "3.x.x"
|
||||
hoek "4.x.x"
|
||||
sntp "2.x.x"
|
||||
|
||||
hmac-drbg@^1.0.0:
|
||||
version "1.0.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/hmac-drbg/-/hmac-drbg-1.0.1.tgz#d2745701025a6c775a6c545793ed502fc0c649a1"
|
||||
|
@ -2938,6 +3020,10 @@ hoek@2.x.x:
|
|||
version "2.16.3"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/hoek/-/hoek-2.16.3.tgz#20bb7403d3cea398e91dc4710a8ff1b8274a25ed"
|
||||
|
||||
hoek@4.x.x:
|
||||
version "4.2.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/hoek/-/hoek-4.2.0.tgz#72d9d0754f7fe25ca2d01ad8f8f9a9449a89526d"
|
||||
|
||||
hoist-non-react-statics@^2.2.1:
|
||||
version "2.3.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/hoist-non-react-statics/-/hoist-non-react-statics-2.3.1.tgz#343db84c6018c650778898240135a1420ee22ce0"
|
||||
|
@ -3011,6 +3097,14 @@ http-signature@~1.1.0:
|
|||
jsprim "^1.2.2"
|
||||
sshpk "^1.7.0"
|
||||
|
||||
http-signature@~1.2.0:
|
||||
version "1.2.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/http-signature/-/http-signature-1.2.0.tgz#9aecd925114772f3d95b65a60abb8f7c18fbace1"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
assert-plus "^1.0.0"
|
||||
jsprim "^1.2.2"
|
||||
sshpk "^1.7.0"
|
||||
|
||||
https-browserify@0.0.1:
|
||||
version "0.0.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/https-browserify/-/https-browserify-0.0.1.tgz#3f91365cabe60b77ed0ebba24b454e3e09d95a82"
|
||||
|
@ -3151,8 +3245,8 @@ interpret@^0.6.4:
|
|||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/interpret/-/interpret-0.6.6.tgz#fecd7a18e7ce5ca6abfb953e1f86213a49f1625b"
|
||||
|
||||
interpret@^1.0.0:
|
||||
version "1.0.4"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/interpret/-/interpret-1.0.4.tgz#820cdd588b868ffb191a809506d6c9c8f212b1b0"
|
||||
version "1.1.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/interpret/-/interpret-1.1.0.tgz#7ed1b1410c6a0e0f78cf95d3b8440c63f78b8614"
|
||||
|
||||
invariant@^2.0.0, invariant@^2.2.2:
|
||||
version "2.2.2"
|
||||
|
@ -3252,6 +3346,10 @@ is-fullwidth-code-point@^2.0.0:
|
|||
version "2.0.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/is-fullwidth-code-point/-/is-fullwidth-code-point-2.0.0.tgz#a3b30a5c4f199183167aaab93beefae3ddfb654f"
|
||||
|
||||
is-function@^1.0.1, is-function@~1.0.0:
|
||||
version "1.0.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/is-function/-/is-function-1.0.1.tgz#12cfb98b65b57dd3d193a3121f5f6e2f437602b5"
|
||||
|
||||
is-glob@^2.0.0, is-glob@^2.0.1:
|
||||
version "2.0.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/is-glob/-/is-glob-2.0.1.tgz#d096f926a3ded5600f3fdfd91198cb0888c2d863"
|
||||
|
@ -3300,8 +3398,8 @@ is-path-in-cwd@^1.0.0:
|
|||
is-path-inside "^1.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
is-path-inside@^1.0.0:
|
||||
version "1.0.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/is-path-inside/-/is-path-inside-1.0.0.tgz#fc06e5a1683fbda13de667aff717bbc10a48f37f"
|
||||
version "1.0.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/is-path-inside/-/is-path-inside-1.0.1.tgz#8ef5b7de50437a3fdca6b4e865ef7aa55cb48036"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
path-is-inside "^1.0.1"
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -3404,8 +3502,8 @@ isurl@^1.0.0-alpha5:
|
|||
is-object "^1.0.1"
|
||||
|
||||
js-base64@^2.1.8, js-base64@^2.1.9:
|
||||
version "2.3.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/js-base64/-/js-base64-2.3.2.tgz#a79a923666372b580f8e27f51845c6f7e8fbfbaf"
|
||||
version "2.4.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/js-base64/-/js-base64-2.4.0.tgz#9e566fee624751a1d720c966cd6226d29d4025aa"
|
||||
|
||||
js-tokens@^3.0.0, js-tokens@^3.0.2:
|
||||
version "3.0.2"
|
||||
|
@ -3673,8 +3771,8 @@ loader-utils@^1.0.2, loader-utils@^1.1.0:
|
|||
json5 "^0.5.0"
|
||||
|
||||
localforage@^1.5.0:
|
||||
version "1.5.3"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/localforage/-/localforage-1.5.3.tgz#698aa16af1022340b240be9d93192e8af022ff16"
|
||||
version "1.5.5"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/localforage/-/localforage-1.5.5.tgz#55fc1c3a88a47f67f5fac6f1231b25ff13556423"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
lie "3.0.2"
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -3778,6 +3876,10 @@ lodash.isempty@^4.4.0:
|
|||
version "4.4.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/lodash.isempty/-/lodash.isempty-4.4.0.tgz#6f86cbedd8be4ec987be9aaf33c9684db1b31e7e"
|
||||
|
||||
lodash.isequal@4.5.0:
|
||||
version "4.5.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/lodash.isequal/-/lodash.isequal-4.5.0.tgz#415c4478f2bcc30120c22ce10ed3226f7d3e18e0"
|
||||
|
||||
lodash.isplainobject@^4.0.6:
|
||||
version "4.0.6"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/lodash.isplainobject/-/lodash.isplainobject-4.0.6.tgz#7c526a52d89b45c45cc690b88163be0497f550cb"
|
||||
|
@ -4017,7 +4119,11 @@ miller-rabin@^4.0.0:
|
|||
bn.js "^4.0.0"
|
||||
brorand "^1.0.1"
|
||||
|
||||
"mime-db@>= 1.30.0 < 2", mime-db@~1.30.0:
|
||||
"mime-db@>= 1.30.0 < 2":
|
||||
version "1.32.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/mime-db/-/mime-db-1.32.0.tgz#485b3848b01a3cda5f968b4882c0771e58e09414"
|
||||
|
||||
mime-db@~1.30.0:
|
||||
version "1.30.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/mime-db/-/mime-db-1.30.0.tgz#74c643da2dd9d6a45399963465b26d5ca7d71f01"
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -4027,10 +4133,14 @@ mime-types@^2.1.12, mime-types@~2.1.15, mime-types@~2.1.16, mime-types@~2.1.17,
|
|||
dependencies:
|
||||
mime-db "~1.30.0"
|
||||
|
||||
mime@1.4.1, mime@^1.2.11, mime@^1.3.4:
|
||||
mime@1.4.1:
|
||||
version "1.4.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/mime/-/mime-1.4.1.tgz#121f9ebc49e3766f311a76e1fa1c8003c4b03aa6"
|
||||
|
||||
mime@^1.2.11, mime@^1.5.0:
|
||||
version "1.6.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/mime/-/mime-1.6.0.tgz#32cd9e5c64553bd58d19a568af452acff04981b1"
|
||||
|
||||
mimic-fn@^1.0.0:
|
||||
version "1.1.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/mimic-fn/-/mimic-fn-1.1.0.tgz#e667783d92e89dbd342818b5230b9d62a672ad18"
|
||||
|
@ -4039,6 +4149,12 @@ mimic-response@^1.0.0:
|
|||
version "1.0.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/mimic-response/-/mimic-response-1.0.0.tgz#df3d3652a73fded6b9b0b24146e6fd052353458e"
|
||||
|
||||
min-document@^2.19.0:
|
||||
version "2.19.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/min-document/-/min-document-2.19.0.tgz#7bd282e3f5842ed295bb748cdd9f1ffa2c824685"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
dom-walk "^0.1.0"
|
||||
|
||||
minimalistic-assert@^1.0.0:
|
||||
version "1.0.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/minimalistic-assert/-/minimalistic-assert-1.0.0.tgz#702be2dda6b37f4836bcb3f5db56641b64a1d3d3"
|
||||
|
@ -4053,7 +4169,7 @@ minimalistic-crypto-utils@^1.0.0, minimalistic-crypto-utils@^1.0.1:
|
|||
dependencies:
|
||||
brace-expansion "^1.1.7"
|
||||
|
||||
minimist@0.0.8, minimist@~0.0.1:
|
||||
minimist@0.0.8:
|
||||
version "0.0.8"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/minimist/-/minimist-0.0.8.tgz#857fcabfc3397d2625b8228262e86aa7a011b05d"
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -4061,6 +4177,10 @@ minimist@^1.1.1, minimist@^1.1.3, minimist@^1.2.0:
|
|||
version "1.2.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/minimist/-/minimist-1.2.0.tgz#a35008b20f41383eec1fb914f4cd5df79a264284"
|
||||
|
||||
minimist@~0.0.1:
|
||||
version "0.0.10"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/minimist/-/minimist-0.0.10.tgz#de3f98543dbf96082be48ad1a0c7cda836301dcf"
|
||||
|
||||
mkdirp@0.5, mkdirp@0.5.1, mkdirp@0.5.x, "mkdirp@>=0.5 0", mkdirp@^0.5.0, mkdirp@^0.5.1, mkdirp@~0.5.0, mkdirp@~0.5.1:
|
||||
version "0.5.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/mkdirp/-/mkdirp-0.5.1.tgz#30057438eac6cf7f8c4767f38648d6697d75c903"
|
||||
|
@ -4091,8 +4211,8 @@ multicast-dns-service-types@^1.1.0:
|
|||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/multicast-dns-service-types/-/multicast-dns-service-types-1.1.0.tgz#899f11d9686e5e05cb91b35d5f0e63b773cfc901"
|
||||
|
||||
multicast-dns@^6.0.1:
|
||||
version "6.2.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/multicast-dns/-/multicast-dns-6.2.0.tgz#13f22d0c32dc5ee82a32878e3c380d875b3eab22"
|
||||
version "6.2.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/multicast-dns/-/multicast-dns-6.2.1.tgz#c5035defa9219d30640558a49298067352098060"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
dns-packet "^1.0.1"
|
||||
thunky "^0.1.0"
|
||||
|
@ -4363,7 +4483,7 @@ number-is-nan@^1.0.0:
|
|||
version "1.0.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/number-is-nan/-/number-is-nan-1.0.1.tgz#097b602b53422a522c1afb8790318336941a011d"
|
||||
|
||||
oauth-sign@~0.8.1:
|
||||
oauth-sign@~0.8.1, oauth-sign@~0.8.2:
|
||||
version "0.8.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/oauth-sign/-/oauth-sign-0.8.2.tgz#46a6ab7f0aead8deae9ec0565780b7d4efeb9d43"
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -4580,6 +4700,13 @@ parse-glob@^3.0.4:
|
|||
is-extglob "^1.0.0"
|
||||
is-glob "^2.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
parse-headers@^2.0.0:
|
||||
version "2.0.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/parse-headers/-/parse-headers-2.0.1.tgz#6ae83a7aa25a9d9b700acc28698cd1f1ed7e9536"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
for-each "^0.3.2"
|
||||
trim "0.0.1"
|
||||
|
||||
parse-json@^2.2.0:
|
||||
version "2.2.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/parse-json/-/parse-json-2.2.0.tgz#f480f40434ef80741f8469099f8dea18f55a4dc9"
|
||||
|
@ -4660,6 +4787,10 @@ performance-now@^0.2.0:
|
|||
version "0.2.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/performance-now/-/performance-now-0.2.0.tgz#33ef30c5c77d4ea21c5a53869d91b56d8f2555e5"
|
||||
|
||||
performance-now@^2.1.0:
|
||||
version "2.1.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/performance-now/-/performance-now-2.1.0.tgz#6309f4e0e5fa913ec1c69307ae364b4b377c9e7b"
|
||||
|
||||
pify@^2.0.0:
|
||||
version "2.3.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/pify/-/pify-2.3.0.tgz#ed141a6ac043a849ea588498e7dca8b15330e90c"
|
||||
|
@ -4976,6 +5107,10 @@ process@^0.11.0, process@^0.11.10:
|
|||
version "0.11.10"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/process/-/process-0.11.10.tgz#7332300e840161bda3e69a1d1d91a7d4bc16f182"
|
||||
|
||||
process@~0.5.1:
|
||||
version "0.5.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/process/-/process-0.5.2.tgz#1638d8a8e34c2f440a91db95ab9aeb677fc185cf"
|
||||
|
||||
progress@^1.1.8:
|
||||
version "1.1.8"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/progress/-/progress-1.1.8.tgz#e260c78f6161cdd9b0e56cc3e0a85de17c7a57be"
|
||||
|
@ -5047,7 +5182,18 @@ q@^1.1.2:
|
|||
version "1.5.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/q/-/q-1.5.1.tgz#7e32f75b41381291d04611f1bf14109ac00651d7"
|
||||
|
||||
qs@6.5.1:
|
||||
qr.js@0.0.0:
|
||||
version "0.0.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/qr.js/-/qr.js-0.0.0.tgz#cace86386f59a0db8050fa90d9b6b0e88a1e364f"
|
||||
|
||||
qrcode.react@^0.7.2:
|
||||
version "0.7.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/qrcode.react/-/qrcode.react-0.7.2.tgz#72a5718fd56baafe15c2c153fe436628d83aa286"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
prop-types "^15.5.8"
|
||||
qr.js "0.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
qs@6.5.1, qs@~6.5.1:
|
||||
version "6.5.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/qs/-/qs-6.5.1.tgz#349cdf6eef89ec45c12d7d5eb3fc0c870343a6d8"
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -5123,8 +5269,8 @@ raw-body@2.3.2:
|
|||
unpipe "1.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
rc-progress@^2.0.6:
|
||||
version "2.2.4"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/rc-progress/-/rc-progress-2.2.4.tgz#45dbdb91cdd71cb5ce22e61313a351ceb5b1488a"
|
||||
version "2.2.5"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/rc-progress/-/rc-progress-2.2.5.tgz#e61d0544bf9d4208e5ba32fc50962159e7f952a3"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
babel-runtime "6.x"
|
||||
prop-types "^15.5.8"
|
||||
|
@ -5164,11 +5310,12 @@ react-markdown@^2.5.0:
|
|||
prop-types "^15.5.1"
|
||||
|
||||
react-modal@^3.1.5:
|
||||
version "3.1.5"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/react-modal/-/react-modal-3.1.5.tgz#9cfdb7634b5003148ffb7c8ead13a36f671d744e"
|
||||
version "3.1.6"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/react-modal/-/react-modal-3.1.6.tgz#82e63f1ec86b80e242518250d066ee37fa035f8a"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
exenv "^1.2.0"
|
||||
prop-types "^15.5.10"
|
||||
warning "^3.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
react-paginate@^5.0.0:
|
||||
version "5.0.0"
|
||||
|
@ -5460,32 +5607,34 @@ repeating@^2.0.0:
|
|||
dependencies:
|
||||
is-finite "^1.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
request@2, request@~2.79.0:
|
||||
version "2.79.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/request/-/request-2.79.0.tgz#4dfe5bf6be8b8cdc37fcf93e04b65577722710de"
|
||||
request@2, request@^2.55.0, request@^2.81.0:
|
||||
version "2.83.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/request/-/request-2.83.0.tgz#ca0b65da02ed62935887808e6f510381034e3356"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
aws-sign2 "~0.6.0"
|
||||
aws4 "^1.2.1"
|
||||
caseless "~0.11.0"
|
||||
aws-sign2 "~0.7.0"
|
||||
aws4 "^1.6.0"
|
||||
caseless "~0.12.0"
|
||||
combined-stream "~1.0.5"
|
||||
extend "~3.0.0"
|
||||
extend "~3.0.1"
|
||||
forever-agent "~0.6.1"
|
||||
form-data "~2.1.1"
|
||||
har-validator "~2.0.6"
|
||||
hawk "~3.1.3"
|
||||
http-signature "~1.1.0"
|
||||
form-data "~2.3.1"
|
||||
har-validator "~5.0.3"
|
||||
hawk "~6.0.2"
|
||||
http-signature "~1.2.0"
|
||||
is-typedarray "~1.0.0"
|
||||
isstream "~0.1.2"
|
||||
json-stringify-safe "~5.0.1"
|
||||
mime-types "~2.1.7"
|
||||
oauth-sign "~0.8.1"
|
||||
qs "~6.3.0"
|
||||
stringstream "~0.0.4"
|
||||
tough-cookie "~2.3.0"
|
||||
tunnel-agent "~0.4.1"
|
||||
uuid "^3.0.0"
|
||||
mime-types "~2.1.17"
|
||||
oauth-sign "~0.8.2"
|
||||
performance-now "^2.1.0"
|
||||
qs "~6.5.1"
|
||||
safe-buffer "^5.1.1"
|
||||
stringstream "~0.0.5"
|
||||
tough-cookie "~2.3.3"
|
||||
tunnel-agent "^0.6.0"
|
||||
uuid "^3.1.0"
|
||||
|
||||
request@2.81.0, request@^2.81.0:
|
||||
request@2.81.0:
|
||||
version "2.81.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/request/-/request-2.81.0.tgz#c6928946a0e06c5f8d6f8a9333469ffda46298a0"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
|
@ -5512,6 +5661,31 @@ request@2.81.0, request@^2.81.0:
|
|||
tunnel-agent "^0.6.0"
|
||||
uuid "^3.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
request@~2.79.0:
|
||||
version "2.79.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/request/-/request-2.79.0.tgz#4dfe5bf6be8b8cdc37fcf93e04b65577722710de"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
aws-sign2 "~0.6.0"
|
||||
aws4 "^1.2.1"
|
||||
caseless "~0.11.0"
|
||||
combined-stream "~1.0.5"
|
||||
extend "~3.0.0"
|
||||
forever-agent "~0.6.1"
|
||||
form-data "~2.1.1"
|
||||
har-validator "~2.0.6"
|
||||
hawk "~3.1.3"
|
||||
http-signature "~1.1.0"
|
||||
is-typedarray "~1.0.0"
|
||||
isstream "~0.1.2"
|
||||
json-stringify-safe "~5.0.1"
|
||||
mime-types "~2.1.7"
|
||||
oauth-sign "~0.8.1"
|
||||
qs "~6.3.0"
|
||||
stringstream "~0.0.4"
|
||||
tough-cookie "~2.3.0"
|
||||
tunnel-agent "~0.4.1"
|
||||
uuid "^3.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
require-directory@^2.1.1:
|
||||
version "2.1.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/require-directory/-/require-directory-2.1.1.tgz#8c64ad5fd30dab1c976e2344ffe7f792a6a6df42"
|
||||
|
@ -5730,6 +5904,13 @@ sha.js@^2.4.0, sha.js@^2.4.8:
|
|||
inherits "^2.0.1"
|
||||
safe-buffer "^5.0.1"
|
||||
|
||||
shapeshift.io@^1.3.1:
|
||||
version "1.3.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/shapeshift.io/-/shapeshift.io-1.3.1.tgz#939f7d89e6a93fad4b556567d3fcdab45d5cc021"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
request "^2.55.0"
|
||||
xhr "^2.0.1"
|
||||
|
||||
shebang-command@^1.2.0:
|
||||
version "1.2.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/shebang-command/-/shebang-command-1.2.0.tgz#44aac65b695b03398968c39f363fee5deafdf1ea"
|
||||
|
@ -5790,6 +5971,12 @@ sntp@1.x.x:
|
|||
dependencies:
|
||||
hoek "2.x.x"
|
||||
|
||||
sntp@2.x.x:
|
||||
version "2.1.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/sntp/-/sntp-2.1.0.tgz#2c6cec14fedc2222739caf9b5c3d85d1cc5a2cc8"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
hoek "4.x.x"
|
||||
|
||||
sockjs-client@1.1.4:
|
||||
version "1.1.4"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/sockjs-client/-/sockjs-client-1.1.4.tgz#5babe386b775e4cf14e7520911452654016c8b12"
|
||||
|
@ -5915,7 +6102,11 @@ staged-git-files@0.0.4:
|
|||
version "0.0.4"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/staged-git-files/-/staged-git-files-0.0.4.tgz#d797e1b551ca7a639dec0237dc6eb4bb9be17d35"
|
||||
|
||||
"statuses@>= 1.3.1 < 2", statuses@~1.3.1:
|
||||
"statuses@>= 1.3.1 < 2":
|
||||
version "1.4.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/statuses/-/statuses-1.4.0.tgz#bb73d446da2796106efcc1b601a253d6c46bd087"
|
||||
|
||||
statuses@~1.3.1:
|
||||
version "1.3.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/statuses/-/statuses-1.3.1.tgz#faf51b9eb74aaef3b3acf4ad5f61abf24cb7b93e"
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -5991,7 +6182,7 @@ string_decoder@^1.0.0, string_decoder@~1.0.3:
|
|||
dependencies:
|
||||
safe-buffer "~5.1.0"
|
||||
|
||||
stringstream@~0.0.4:
|
||||
stringstream@~0.0.4, stringstream@~0.0.5:
|
||||
version "0.0.5"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/stringstream/-/stringstream-0.0.5.tgz#4e484cd4de5a0bbbee18e46307710a8a81621878"
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -6067,8 +6258,8 @@ svgo@^0.7.0:
|
|||
whet.extend "~0.9.9"
|
||||
|
||||
symbol-observable@^1.0.1, symbol-observable@^1.0.3:
|
||||
version "1.0.4"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/symbol-observable/-/symbol-observable-1.0.4.tgz#29bf615d4aa7121bdd898b22d4b3f9bc4e2aa03d"
|
||||
version "1.1.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/symbol-observable/-/symbol-observable-1.1.0.tgz#5c68fd8d54115d9dfb72a84720549222e8db9b32"
|
||||
|
||||
table@^3.7.8:
|
||||
version "3.8.3"
|
||||
|
@ -6162,7 +6353,7 @@ to-fast-properties@^1.0.3:
|
|||
version "1.0.3"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/to-fast-properties/-/to-fast-properties-1.0.3.tgz#b83571fa4d8c25b82e231b06e3a3055de4ca1a47"
|
||||
|
||||
tough-cookie@~2.3.0:
|
||||
tough-cookie@~2.3.0, tough-cookie@~2.3.3:
|
||||
version "2.3.3"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/tough-cookie/-/tough-cookie-2.3.3.tgz#0b618a5565b6dea90bf3425d04d55edc475a7561"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
|
@ -6180,6 +6371,10 @@ trim-right@^1.0.1:
|
|||
version "1.0.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/trim-right/-/trim-right-1.0.1.tgz#cb2e1203067e0c8de1f614094b9fe45704ea6003"
|
||||
|
||||
trim@0.0.1:
|
||||
version "0.0.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/trim/-/trim-0.0.1.tgz#5858547f6b290757ee95cccc666fb50084c460dd"
|
||||
|
||||
"true-case-path@^1.0.2":
|
||||
version "1.0.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/true-case-path/-/true-case-path-1.0.2.tgz#7ec91130924766c7f573be3020c34f8fdfd00d62"
|
||||
|
@ -6371,7 +6566,7 @@ uuid@^2.0.2:
|
|||
version "2.0.3"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/uuid/-/uuid-2.0.3.tgz#67e2e863797215530dff318e5bf9dcebfd47b21a"
|
||||
|
||||
uuid@^3.0.0:
|
||||
uuid@^3.0.0, uuid@^3.1.0:
|
||||
version "3.1.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/uuid/-/uuid-3.1.0.tgz#3dd3d3e790abc24d7b0d3a034ffababe28ebbc04"
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -6423,6 +6618,12 @@ vm-browserify@0.0.4:
|
|||
dependencies:
|
||||
indexof "0.0.1"
|
||||
|
||||
warning@^3.0.0:
|
||||
version "3.0.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/warning/-/warning-3.0.0.tgz#32e5377cb572de4ab04753bdf8821c01ed605b7c"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
loose-envify "^1.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
watchpack@^0.2.1:
|
||||
version "0.2.9"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/watchpack/-/watchpack-0.2.9.tgz#62eaa4ab5e5ba35fdfc018275626e3c0f5e3fb0b"
|
||||
|
@ -6453,18 +6654,18 @@ webpack-core@~0.6.9:
|
|||
source-map "~0.4.1"
|
||||
|
||||
webpack-dev-middleware@^1.11.0:
|
||||
version "1.12.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/webpack-dev-middleware/-/webpack-dev-middleware-1.12.0.tgz#d34efefb2edda7e1d3b5dbe07289513219651709"
|
||||
version "1.12.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/webpack-dev-middleware/-/webpack-dev-middleware-1.12.2.tgz#f8fc1120ce3b4fc5680ceecb43d777966b21105e"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
memory-fs "~0.4.1"
|
||||
mime "^1.3.4"
|
||||
mime "^1.5.0"
|
||||
path-is-absolute "^1.0.0"
|
||||
range-parser "^1.0.3"
|
||||
time-stamp "^2.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
webpack-dev-server@^2.4.4:
|
||||
version "2.9.4"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/webpack-dev-server/-/webpack-dev-server-2.9.4.tgz#7883e61759c6a4b33e9b19ec4037bd4ab61428d1"
|
||||
version "2.9.5"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/webpack-dev-server/-/webpack-dev-server-2.9.5.tgz#79336fba0087a66ae491f4869f6545775b18daa8"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
ansi-html "0.0.7"
|
||||
array-includes "^3.0.3"
|
||||
|
@ -6474,7 +6675,7 @@ webpack-dev-server@^2.4.4:
|
|||
connect-history-api-fallback "^1.3.0"
|
||||
debug "^3.1.0"
|
||||
del "^3.0.0"
|
||||
express "^4.13.3"
|
||||
express "^4.16.2"
|
||||
html-entities "^1.2.0"
|
||||
http-proxy-middleware "~0.17.4"
|
||||
import-local "^0.1.1"
|
||||
|
@ -6509,8 +6710,8 @@ webpack-notifier@^1.5.0:
|
|||
strip-ansi "^3.0.1"
|
||||
|
||||
webpack-sources@^1.0.1:
|
||||
version "1.0.2"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/webpack-sources/-/webpack-sources-1.0.2.tgz#d0148ec083b3b5ccef1035a6b3ec16442983b27a"
|
||||
version "1.1.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/webpack-sources/-/webpack-sources-1.1.0.tgz#a101ebae59d6507354d71d8013950a3a8b7a5a54"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
source-list-map "^2.0.0"
|
||||
source-map "~0.6.1"
|
||||
|
@ -6542,8 +6743,8 @@ webpack@^1.12.0:
|
|||
webpack-core "~0.6.9"
|
||||
|
||||
webpack@^3.0.0:
|
||||
version "3.8.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/webpack/-/webpack-3.8.1.tgz#b16968a81100abe61608b0153c9159ef8bb2bd83"
|
||||
version "3.9.1"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/webpack/-/webpack-3.9.1.tgz#9a60aa544ed5d4d454c069e3f521aa007e02643c"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
acorn "^5.0.0"
|
||||
acorn-dynamic-import "^2.0.0"
|
||||
|
@ -6648,6 +6849,15 @@ write@^0.2.1:
|
|||
dependencies:
|
||||
mkdirp "^0.5.1"
|
||||
|
||||
xhr@^2.0.1:
|
||||
version "2.4.0"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/xhr/-/xhr-2.4.0.tgz#e16e66a45f869861eeefab416d5eff722dc40993"
|
||||
dependencies:
|
||||
global "~4.3.0"
|
||||
is-function "^1.0.1"
|
||||
parse-headers "^2.0.0"
|
||||
xtend "^4.0.0"
|
||||
|
||||
xss-filters@^1.2.6:
|
||||
version "1.2.7"
|
||||
resolved "https://registry.yarnpkg.com/xss-filters/-/xss-filters-1.2.7.tgz#59fa1de201f36f2f3470dcac5f58ccc2830b0a9a"
|
||||
|
|
There's got to be a better way to do this. Can these be added to the
.flowconfig
?