3 ms·

I used Redux when it first came out, but now use Mobx as it's just... easier and has less boilerplate. Also it's easy to extend into a reframe-like pure functio

by IBCNU 8y ago

I used Redux when it first came out, but now use Mobx as it's just... easier and has less boilerplate. Also it's easy to extend into a reframe-like pure function state management system if you want to avoid passing around objects/inheritance.

robertAngst 8y ago
My new note to self: Dont read threads about the stack I'm dealing with. It will only make me question everything.
- su8898 8y ago
  So true. I must start doing this as well. I recently started picking up momentum on my React-Redux skills. Constantly reading various opinion pieces (irrespective of whether they are supported/non-supported) are tempting me to take a look a look at (or evaluate) other libs/frameworks.
  - paulwithap 8y ago
    If it helps, I’ve used Redux in a couple production apps and loved it. Boilerplate can be a bit tedious at times, but in exchange you get a lot of sanity and clarity in your code.
- abritinthebay 8y ago
  Mostly it just makes me think people have not actually used what they complain about.
srameshc 8y ago
I love Mobx. It was fun and easy to understand specially when I tried to understand the state management. But then I realized Redux is basically easy, two things to understand MapStateToProps and MapDispatch to props and then rest is all easy to follow from there. Then with Redux Saga and it is super fun and many possibilities.
root_axis 8y ago
Both are usually unnecessary, just pass down functions that call setState as props. That method works for 95% of problems and has the added benefit of being idiomatic react, thus making it easier to read, maintain and reason about. There are some rare cases where something like redux makes sense, e.g. you're hooked into some kind of streaming wire protocol and your UI needs to make many updates in real time based on a variety of diverse messages streaming over the wire. Most of the time though, these opinionated state management solutions are overkill.

by IBCNU 8y ago

robertAngst 8y ago

My new note to self: Dont read threads about the stack I'm dealing with. It will only make me question everything.

su8898 8y ago
So true. I must start doing this as well. I recently started picking up momentum on my React-Redux skills. Constantly reading various opinion pieces (irrespective of whether they are supported/non-supported) are tempting me to take a look a look at (or evaluate) other libs/frameworks.
- paulwithap 8y ago
  If it helps, I’ve used Redux in a couple production apps and loved it. Boilerplate can be a bit tedious at times, but in exchange you get a lot of sanity and clarity in your code.
abritinthebay 8y ago
Mostly it just makes me think people have not actually used what they complain about.

srameshc 8y ago

I love Mobx. It was fun and easy to understand specially when I tried to understand the state management. But then I realized Redux is basically easy, two things to understand MapStateToProps and MapDispatch to props and then rest is all easy to follow from there. Then with Redux Saga and it is super fun and many possibilities.

root_axis 8y ago

Both are usually unnecessary, just pass down functions that call setState as props. That method works for 95% of problems and has the added benefit of being idiomatic react, thus making it easier to read, maintain and reason about. There are some rare cases where something like redux makes sense, e.g. you're hooked into some kind of streaming wire protocol and your UI needs to make many updates in real time based on a variety of diverse messages streaming over the wire. Most of the time though, these opinionated state management solutions are overkill.