I think the parent is correct to point out two things. That re-frame is useful in bigger teams and it is useful for larger apps. Re-frame is somewhat more comp

I think the parent is correct to point out two things. That re-frame is useful in bigger teams and it is useful for larger apps. Re-frame is somewhat more complex than inline and vanilla reagent. I suppose with hooks a lot of the simpler use cases for state management also go away. That said, as a discipline the indirection re-frame encourages you to use helps you architect a purely functional* application. My observation is a lot of larger user facing applications will tend towards something that is event-driven and possibly loosely a state machine. Which incidentally also is one of the implementations of "functional core imperative shell" Ultimately YMMV. If you just want a static site with a tiny bit of sparkle then you probably don't need reframe. (possibly you don't need cljs/reagent) If you're tending towards a large full blown SPA with lots of interactivity and IO plus failure states, then reframe probably isn't a bad solution IMO. * subscribe and dispatch are strictly not pure and actually use global state so purely functional isn't actually accurate. But it is a reasonable stab at being purely functional, while strongly quarantining the side-effecting bits.