Add LightCycles.bind() to the built-in dispatchers section readme

[NikoYuwono]

Fix #36

@glung So we agree to use solution number one (for anyone else, please see the discussion in the issue)

• Keep the auto-binding for Activity and Fragment
• Add rule for when the LightCycles.bind() need to be called in Dispatchers and add them to Readme (Possibly in Built-in dispatcher section)

So I added the LightCycles.bind() into Built-in Dispatcher section, to make it clearer for the user when to call LightCycles.bind()

Let me know if you have any feedback or different idea! :)

[glung]

Add rule for when the LightCycles.bind() need to be called and add them to Readme

I think I misread it. adding the LightCycles.bind call by defaul in built in disptchers ?

That's what I meant about perf when I wrote the following :

I think option 1 is better for the users for the lib and if we have perf issues we will address them later. I am confident.

[NikoYuwono]

I think I misread it. adding the LightCycles.bind call by defaul in built in disptchers ?

Sorry if my explanation is ambigous. From what I understand is we need to call LightCycles.bind() if we extends built-in dispatchers (ActivityLightCycleDispatcher, FragmentLightCycleDispatcher, SupportFragmentLightCycleDispatcher) like what we have in current example.

So based on our previous discussion, we agreed that we don't need to implement auto-binding because we think there won't be any significant performance difference with it. So we won't change the current implementation of Dispatchers.

But I also worried about the problem of the user not knowing when to call LightCycles.bind() inside Dispatcher because currently there are no standard when to call it inside Dispatcher.

So I think with this Readme update, I think we can made it clear to user to ask them to call LightCycles.bind() inside onCreate() method

Please let me know if I misunderstand something!

[glung]

Let me put it this way, if we add LightCycles.bind() in the dispatcher base classes (like for the activities and fragment), it will bind transparently any dispatcher extending the bae one.

And because we are not expecting a significant performance difference with it, we can just push it.

Here is what I mean : 9d3cd37.

[NikoYuwono]

Oh sorry for the misunderstanding! I`ll close this PR then.