> React sucks
If it sucked nobody would be using it.
Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
21–30 of 105 posts
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#22People are really missing the point here. Follow staltz on twitter, he really knows his stuff. React is very good, however it missing a few key things that would make it awesome and more consistent - namely compositional event processing. Where React falls short from perfect is by using imperative code for its lifecycle functions. He's not bashing React, he's educating you about an even better way. If you care about…
> He's not bashing React
I quote him
> React sucks
How do you call it? a constructive criticism ?
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#23Okay, so React is not fully reactive. But to say people shouldn't use it because it's not reactive? because it abstracts virtual-dom? because it should be more reactive-friendly?! Seems like the author was offended they said they are reactive, and made a non-informative presentation, that comes off as a rant because of the rising popularity. Edit: looking at his Cycle framework's "Why?" on github, besides the part of…
He makes a weak case by focusing on the terminology. Quibble if you ask me.
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#24Okay, so React is not fully reactive. But to say people shouldn't use it because it's not reactive? because it abstracts virtual-dom? because it should be more reactive-friendly?! Seems like the author was offended they said they are reactive, and made a non-informative presentation, that comes off as a rant because of the rising popularity. Edit: looking at his Cycle framework's "Why?" on github, besides the part of…
Actually you are wrong. Follow him and others on twitter and you will see that they are some of the most forward thinking people on these types of frontend technologies.
om and elm.are the future, which is functional and immutable. React is the gateway to those technologies, which have a long and strong academic foundation.
The days of hacking together things on the frontend are over, more sound approaches are needed, and those developers who embrace them will have their pick of jobs and a fistful of cash.
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#25Okay, so React is not fully reactive. But to say people shouldn't use it because it's not reactive? because it abstracts virtual-dom? because it should be more reactive-friendly?! Seems like the author was offended they said they are reactive, and made a non-informative presentation, that comes off as a rant because of the rising popularity. Edit: looking at his Cycle framework's "Why?" on github, besides the part of…
He makes a weak case by focusing on the terminology. Quibble if you ask me.
Its not hairsplitting, maybe you read the FRP papers by Conal Eliot.
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#26All this links to is a page that does nothing (tested on FF and Chrome). Is there a point this is trying to make? The link itself is meaningless. If I am missing something, kindly let me know...
Always view source. (=
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#27> React sucks If it sucked nobody would be using it.
PHP is pretty popular ...
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#28Okay, so React is not fully reactive. But to say people shouldn't use it because it's not reactive? because it abstracts virtual-dom? because it should be more reactive-friendly?! Seems like the author was offended they said they are reactive, and made a non-informative presentation, that comes off as a rant because of the rising popularity. Edit: looking at his Cycle framework's "Why?" on github, besides the part of…
Actually you are wrong. Follow him and others on twitter and you will see that they are some of the most forward thinking people on these types of frontend technologies. om and elm.are the future, which is functional and immutable. React is the gateway to those technologies, which have a long and strong academic foundation. The days of hacking together things on the frontend are over, more sound approaches are needed…
When do the academic implementations become successful? Rarely. The practical ones do, that use the important ideas and make them palatable. Usually the academic versions require one giant step off what people ever want to do. In the presentation, code goes off the direct path with intermediary objects. React's component approach is straightforward. The presentation fails to make a straightforward case of why its concepts are important. It just sounds petulant.
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#29People are really missing the point here. Follow staltz on twitter, he really knows his stuff. React is very good, however it missing a few key things that would make it awesome and more consistent - namely compositional event processing. Where React falls short from perfect is by using imperative code for its lifecycle functions. He's not bashing React, he's educating you about an even better way. If you care about…
> He's not bashing React I quote him > React sucks How do you call it? a constructive criticism ?
If you look at the source code of React vs Mercury you might agree with him. Sucks is a strong word, however.
He's passionate about this stuff because there is a very simple mathematics to frontend development (both declarative UI and immutable state as a function of mutational events) that has been hiding in academic papers and haskell minds that is now coming to the forefront.
There is a better way, and it can reasoned about much better than other approaches.
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#30Okay, so React is not fully reactive. But to say people shouldn't use it because it's not reactive? because it abstracts virtual-dom? because it should be more reactive-friendly?! Seems like the author was offended they said they are reactive, and made a non-informative presentation, that comes off as a rant because of the rising popularity. Edit: looking at his Cycle framework's "Why?" on github, besides the part of…
Actually you are wrong. Follow him and others on twitter and you will see that they are some of the most forward thinking people on these types of frontend technologies. om and elm.are the future, which is functional and immutable. React is the gateway to those technologies, which have a long and strong academic foundation. The days of hacking together things on the frontend are over, more sound approaches are needed…
Om is built on top of React. I'm not sure how you reconcile "React sucks" with "Om is the future" given that.