Columns specified as object instead of Map

[roblotter]

Feedback from a team using infinite-table

As a more general comment, IMO, I think that the Map might be used internally for performance reasons inside the infinite-table but the users could have also the choice to configure the react component using primitive objects (array, object). Indeed, being forced to use a map:

• is forcing us to keep a state In the component that renders the table and maintain it,
• does not follow the traditional way of handling when a react component is rendered (changing a prop for rerendering a component), we need to mutate the map instead.
• and using a mutable map is not compliant with Redux rules

[roblotter]

We value this kind of feedback and it's what makes the product grow.

We went with using a Map for these reasons:

• we didn't want to use an array because when people use an array it immediately implies order. Although when columnOrder is not specified, the columns are displayed in the iteration order of the map.
• for simple use-cases, it's easy to add/remove columns from the map. Though it's not the cleanest React pattern, it's something that's easy for beginners that are just getting started.
  Now that Changing columns map reference after data #6 is fixed, it should be easy to simply pass a new map when you want to update columns (if you don't want to mutate it).

All these being said, I think we could add support for passing columns as an object, where keys are the column ids. We need to make a few changes internally, but probably in a week or so, we can ship this.

[roblotter]

We added support for passing columns as objects - this is actually the way we'll encourage people to define columns going forward. We need to update the docs on that, so we'll keep this discussion open until we do that

[roblotter]

We're updating our docs site to use objects instead of maps and encourage that going forward.