2 ms·
> to make "reactivity" (hence React) You put it in quotes but some might be missing the point you're making which is that React is not reactive. See this quot
by pier25 4y ago
> to make "reactivity" (hence React)
You put it in quotes but some might be missing the point you're making which is that React is not reactive.
See this quote from the docs:
> There is an internal joke in the team that React should have been called “Schedule” because React does not want to be fully “reactive”.
https://reactjs.org/docs/design-principles.html#scheduling https://reactjs.org/docs/design-principles.html#scheduling
- pier25 4y agoAnother point I'd like to make is that you don't really need reactivity. Frameworks like Mithril or Imba are not reactive, at all, and they work just fine for many use cases. The advantage is that state can be just vanilla JS. No need for any abstraction. For example Mithril re-renders everything to the VDOM after a user event (click, etc) automatically. You can also tell Mithril to redraw [0] eg if you have a WS handler or something state change not related to user input. I think Imba works very similarly but I don't have much experience with it. It's a super simple mental model which I like a lot more than anything else. I'm mainly using Svelte now though for other reasons. [0] https://mithril.js.org/redraw.html https://mithril.js.org/redraw.html