3 ms·
Cycle is indeed interesting! React is not “fully reactive” by design, and does not plan to move further into the reactive direction. We think that React is well
by danabramov 10y ago
Cycle is indeed interesting! React is not “fully reactive” by design, and does not plan to move further into the reactive direction. We think that React is well-positioned in the app to understand how to efficiently schedule work instead, which is something that would be harder for us to do with a reactive “push” approach. I think as time goes, it will be interesting to see how both Cycle and React evolve into different directions, and what different tradeoffs they might present and benefit from.
- jessaustin 10y agoIf you haven't looked at it in some time, Cycle.js has just really improved in the last month, an effort the devs are calling "diversity". Under the hood, that means RxJS is no longer a hard dependency, as a bunch of different reactive modules are now usable, including Staltz's new "xstream". Not having looked at Cycle in a few months, I'm not certain what all the particular changes have been, but I'm finding everything just seems simpler and more obvious. Admittedly, I am an RxJS novice, and some of the constructions I saw with that before just confused me.
- adamnemecek 10y agoThere has also been some perf work done recently it seems http://www.stefankrause.net/wp/?p=301 http://www.stefankrause.net/wp/?p=301 I have to look a little closer at the tests to be able to interpret the data but taking it on face value it seems like they are doing good work.