6 ms·
Right see, this is what all redux proponents advocate. Every redux project I see is chock-ful of "extras" to make redux workable, and this changes from season t
by banachtarski 7y ago
Right see, this is what all redux proponents advocate. Every redux project I see is chock-ful of "extras" to make redux workable, and this changes from season to season. If this isn't an architectural smell, I don't know what is.
- bauerd 7y agoNot sure why different libraries would be an architectural smell. Not only Redux projects vary greatly in what they bolt onto their state management. I've used Redux successfully on its own. The dataflow pattern it mandates is important, not the concrete implementation.
- egeozcan 7y agoYou can use the built-in IoC controller or Autofac or ServiceStack or whatever you want along with ASP.NET Core projects. I don't think it is architectural smell at all. Also I find classifying people as Redux-proponents funny. It's not a camp, or at least not supposed to be one.
- fastball 7y agoRedux itself is a very simple concept. There is so much boilerplate because the actual library makes very few opinionated decisions. The issue is that people are looking for something comprehensive from what is supposed to be a minimal base library which you can use to build a huge variety of other things.