I was about to start a small hobby project with kefir.js and react. Looks like I need to take a look a this too. Anybody have any experience with FRP libs? How do RxJS, lazy.js, bacon.js, kefir.js and others compare?
Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
41–50 of 105 posts
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#42Instead of the down voting nonsense, read this: http://computationallyendowed.com/blog/2014/07/20/reactive-m... Basically: view m0 = r0 view (m1 = handler e0 m0) = r1 view (m2 = handler e1 m1) = r2 Or just down vote and learn nothing.
"Basically"? I'm finding it difficult to answer your post with anything other than incredulity. Either way this post doesn't negate the fact that the attitude presented in the OP pretty much stinks.
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#43Clearly the author has never heard of ClojureScript's Om.
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#44> React sucks If it sucked nobody would be using it.
>If it sucked nobody would be using it.
Really? History is filled with stuff that sucks and people still use it.
As an example, J2EE circa 2002-2006 is a good example, with everybody, including its own designers agreeing now that it sucks hard. And yet it was widely used in the enterprise.
Your comeback to the other commenter is even more illogical. He points to PHP (as an example of something arguably sucky that people do use) and you respond that "PHP is not a Javascript framework".
So? Did you really meant your original statement ("If it sucked nobody would be using it") as something that only holds for JS frameworks (and not also for things like programming languages or libraries)?
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#45People 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…
> People are really missing the point here. Follow staltz on twitter, he really knows his stuff.
Whether he's brilliant on twitter or not is irrelevant. People are judging the presentation. Even if he's the most brilliant mind in the 21st century, that doesn't shield his work from scrutiny.
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#46Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#47He implies that Grunt is dead on the first slide. Well don't I feel stupid since I still use it. I guess it's not cool anymore? I missed the memo. Wait, maybe I'm not cool? What do the cool kids use now instead of Grunt?
Broccoli, Gulp, Mimosa.
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#48Clearly the author has never heard of ClojureScript's Om.
How does Om not suffer from the same problems? It's just an Clojurescript interface to React.
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#49I see a lot of misappropriation of terminology (in this case, "reactive") in libraries and documentation. But unfortunately this is something that has been going on for a long time and it's an impossible task to stop and, check and verify everything that is released.
However, if this is the case, then the criticism here against React shouldn't be that they're not reactive, but that they've used "reactive" wrong in their documentation.
Like other commentors, I also don't like the message in the slides and do not think that criticizing a competitor is a good form of marketing. But, I do think we should remember that it's hard to get the full context from slides and to not judge too quickly.
Re: Don't React (Presentation - Use arrows to navigate)
#50Instead of the down voting nonsense, read this: http://computationallyendowed.com/blog/2014/07/20/reactive-m... Basically: view m0 = r0 view (m1 = handler e0 m0) = r1 view (m2 = handler e1 m1) = r2 Or just down vote and learn nothing.
"Basically"? I'm finding it difficult to answer your post with anything other than incredulity. Either way this post doesn't negate the fact that the attitude presented in the OP pretty much stinks.
Christ almighty, this is pathetic. Did you read the link?