5 ms·
Just out of curiosity. I'm trying to decide which client-side framework/language to dive into, and it seems that many people consider Om Next a really nice step
by zellyn 10y ago
Just out of curiosity. I'm trying to decide which client-side framework/language to dive into, and it seems that many people consider Om Next a really nice step forward, away from "giant blob of state". My (uninformed) observation is that Elm does things the way Om (previous) did it: is that correct? Is Elm aiming to incorporate Om Next's advantages?
- dreamdu5t 10y agoElm does things the same way. However, PureScript has lenses so the same thing can be done if you're using the equivelant of Elm in purescript, purescript-pux
- masklinn 10y ago> My (uninformed) observation is that Elm does things the way Om (previous) did it: is that correct? It's not, Elm doesn't use cursors and transactional mutations, I'd say the Elm architecture is closer to a pure single-store Redux: user actions are dispatched as Sub Action which are run through an update reducer (Action -> Model -> Model), which is then run through the view (Model -> Html) resulting in the new UI state.
- Scarbutt 10y agoAs far as I understand Om.next still uses a "giant blob of state" - a global atom. It differs from re-frame/reagent in how you access this state, the global atom.