5 ms·
You are not the only one debugging large apps. How does the wider world of programming debug stuff without actions and reducers? It’s crazy how the Redux peopl
by runawaybottle 6y ago
You are not the only one debugging large apps. How does the wider world of programming debug stuff without actions and reducers?
It’s crazy how the Redux people either always appeal to authority (‘my app is bigger than yours’) or can’t say anything more than ‘I just like it’.
And to play the rhetorical game, what happens when you have hundreds of thousands of lines of insane Redux code where you have lost all sense of the state tree and need to mentally cordon off one single piece of it to not go insane? Kind of like how libraries like this are already doing it.
So here is my challenge to you. Spec out an app that you believe can only be solved with Redux at scale (or rather, highlight the areas of the app that absolutely benefit from Redux, but please provide as detailed a spec as you can if you have the time, or care for that matter). I’d love to hear about this incredible web app.
- qudat 6y agoThe reason is because the problems that surface at scale are difficult to illustrate in a comparison blog, which is the foundation for all the rants against redux. Redux is not complex, contrary to popular belief. The core code can be written in 100 LoC. The real downside to redux is not the boilerplate that is required to set it up or the number of concepts to learn, instead it’s how easy it is to do it incorrectly. The redux maintainers have spent the last few years not making changes to the core library, but figuring out conventions and helper libraries to make it more clear what you should (eg normalize state) and should not (put every piece of state) in your redux store. No offense but the spec exercise seems like a waste of both of our time. No amount of talking about an app can illustrate the code organization at scale.