51–60 of 131 posts
It's worth mentioning Elm, a (truly) functional-reactive language, based on virtual-DOM. http://elm-lang.org/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't fail at UX - it's intended to be a presentation manually controlled by the presenter. Just because someone posted a link to Hacker News doesn't mean the author intended for it to be here.
They did put it on the web.
Coming from a jQuery background, I'm intrigued by ReactJS (especially JSX and components). However, I've also been reading up on Meteor and find it very impressive (if you're willing to consider an end-to-end framework). I didn't notice any mention of Meteor as an example of a true reactive framework in his presentation.
Programmers love to make things. When you make something, you want to bash the thing that you are "better" at. This comes will all kinds of blindfolds though (you may be on the right track, but you need to be aware of these blindfolds). There are so many examples as to why his criticisms don't hold. If you don't like something about React, it's easy to make your own base component and add your own Observable semantics. Check out Om, a ClojureScript framework on top of React, which changes all sorts of stuff (https://github.com/omcljs/om). React is a platform (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hGHdETNteE).
Why is it so important to reuse React? When you author a new framework, another blindfold is lack of community. You don't understand how important it is that authors of React can download tens to hundreds of incredibly advanced components ready to use (like https://github.com/gaearon/react-dnd).
EDIT: Apparently, this presentation was tongue-in-cheek (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9316187), which totally changes everything. I hate just seeing the slides!
To me it doesn't matter what React likes to think it is, to me as a front-end developer all that matters is the tool that I choose can do the job. React is just another tool, in a way it is like jQuery: it doesn't do everything and it shouldn't be used for things that need something else more full figured or suited for the task at hand. I think Facebook do a great job explaining what React is and as far as I am aware…
typo: Facebook ARE dogfooding
I like to joke that it's because here in America, corporations are people too, you know.
Do people really consider Grunt dead?
Do people really consider Grunt dead?
For anyone else who, like me, didn't realize it - there's a little triangle on the bottom right to let you go through the presentation.