Cloact: Minimalistic React for ClojureScript • Hacker News Board

Re: Cloact: Minimalistic React for ClojureScript

#41

Post by jacobolus » Sat, Jan 11, 2014, 8:43 AM UTC

craigching wrote: post #40

swannodette wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the React approach very declarative. Certainly competitive with most of the templating systems I've used, few of which I can speak very highly of :)

I've used both dojo dijit and angularjs templates. I admit, I haven't done more than read your blog on Om, but I very much prefer the html declarative templates of both dojo and angularjs ... show me how Om/React beats direct html templates, I'm not seeing it. I'm not trying to be too non-constructive critical here, I fully admit I haven't tried Om/React, just looked at your blog post about it. So what am I missing?

Using clojure data syntax instead of SGML-like syntax doesn’t make the language any more or less “declarative”. Assuming you use the same features in your templates, the clojure version is precisely as declarative as whatever other template language.

However, if you use the clojurescript version [or in standard React, the javascript- or coffeescript-looking version], then you suddenly have a bunch of potential extra features which in some cases are invaluable. (Or you can deliberately ignore those if you prefer.)

When you say “declarative” I think you might really just mean “familiar for html experts”. But most html expert should be able to learn the new syntax quite easily, since the relevant parts are less verbose than html, quite regular and straightforward, and semantically equivalent.

If you feel like putting your templates in separate files from your logic, or writing them using an SGML-like syntax, that’s pretty trivial to do in any of these environments.

Re: Cloact: Minimalistic React for ClojureScript

#42

Post by craigching » Sat, Jan 11, 2014, 1:45 PM UTC

jacobolus wrote: post #41

craigching wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've used both dojo dijit and angularjs templates. I admit, I haven't done more than read your blog on Om, but I very much prefer the html declarative templates of both dojo and angularjs ... show me how Om/React beats direct html templates, I'm not seeing it. I'm not trying to be too non-constructive critical here, I fully admit I haven't tried Om/React, just looked at your blog post about it. So what am I missing?

Using clojure data syntax instead of SGML-like syntax doesn’t make the language any more or less “declarative”. Assuming you use the same features in your templates, the clojure version is precisely as declarative as whatever other template language. However, if you use the clojurescript version [or in standard React, the javascript- or coffeescript-looking version], then you suddenly have a bunch of potential extra…

Sounds like I need to give it a try, thanks for the feedback!

Re: Cloact: Minimalistic React for ClojureScript

#43

Post by downer86 » Sat, Jan 11, 2014, 2:13 PM UTC

smrtinsert wrote: post #28

fourply wrote: post #11

I can't see that word without thinking of Cloaca. Cloaca. If you don't know what it is, you should. Cloaca.

I never thought that I would need this at Hacker News. A nsfw warning would suffice.

Ha ha! Oh wow! I just ran a google image search to see what you were talking about...

Knowing what a cloaca is beforehand, and then searching for it anyway on Google produces some truly curious results. I was trying to mentally prepare myself for what I may be about to see, because I couldn't imagine what might be on the other side, that would prompt your reaction. The only thing I could think of was some bizarre new form of bestiality that lurks in the shadows of taboo obscurity.

It turns out that most of the images are of obvious medical or scientific origin. I don't even know why pictures of humans show up in the search. I saw lots of pictures of various reptile junk which was totally expected, and none of it was being unceremoniously violated by unscrupulous human beings, so thank god for that!

Apparently there's a medical condition, "Persistent Cloaca Perineum", which is frequently misdiagnosed as "Imperforate Anus with Rectovaginal Fistula." The pictures that depict the condition are mostly de-identified newborn infants, and they originate from edu domains, but in a google search without proper context, they're kind of unexpected. I guess you learn something new every day...