4 ms·

I like the effort and thats it’s freeware, but that react code looks horrible.

taeric 4y ago
I'm curious what is bad about it? Not in an "I don't believe you" way, but in a "I would love to know what would improve it." Starting to push to clean up some web pages I've been close to at work, finally.
- e1g 4y ago
  Not OP, but some patterns instantly stood out - * The use of `useCallback` is confusing in the demo code and is entirely unnecessary. * Inconsistent use of single/double quotes and {}'s for literal values. * Non-idiomatic combination of JSX elements + raw HTML in strings [1] [1] e.g. https://unovis.dev/gallery/view?collection=Lines%20and%20Areas&title=Basic%20Timeline https://unovis.dev/gallery/view?collection=Lines%20and%20Are...
  - taeric 4y ago
    I assumed the was just directionally wise? That is, it is clearly useless here, as there are no "dependencies" passed; but in a real app you almost certainly have something there. Still digesting the rest. I'm curious why the mix of raw HTML. (Not in why it is a bad idea, but why it was felt necessary.)
    - e1g 4y ago
      In this specific case, having useCallback makes the demo code more complex and is unrelated to the actual concept being demo'ed to the reader. It's unwise to add unnecessary complexity if it doesn't add clarity. More generally, adding useCallback is even directionally wrong unless you know _exactly_ why you need it ("for identity" is OK, "for performance" is almost always misguided because the cost of creating a closure is negligible).
      - taeric 4y ago
        Wouldn't you want it to be "dependent" on whatever the source of the data is?
  - eyelidlessness 4y ago
    All valid, but the thing that stood out to me most besides useCallback being weirdly inlined—and this is more important IMO—is how awkward everything around labels is. Surely there could be a base labels component that just takes `data`, or at least doesn’t require so much ceremony around the vanilla interface. The Svelte and vanilla examples are almost identical, but the Angular example looks much more like I’d expect, which strongly suggests (to me) that this is an Angular library with support for other uses bolted on as an afterthought. That’s all fine, but it probably won’t get much non-Angular adoption if there’s no further effort to make it feel somewhat more idiomatic in other environments. Even if it looks quite nice otherwise (which at a glance it does!).

I'm curious what is bad about it? Not in an "I don't believe you" way, but in a "I would love to know what would improve it." Starting to push to clean up some web pages I've been close to at work, finally.

e1g 4y ago
Not OP, but some patterns instantly stood out - * The use of `useCallback` is confusing in the demo code and is entirely unnecessary. * Inconsistent use of single/double quotes and {}'s for literal values. * Non-idiomatic combination of JSX elements + raw HTML in strings [1] [1] e.g. https://unovis.dev/gallery/view?collection=Lines%20and%20Areas&title=Basic%20Timeline https://unovis.dev/gallery/view?collection=Lines%20and%20Are...
- taeric 4y ago
  I assumed the was just directionally wise? That is, it is clearly useless here, as there are no "dependencies" passed; but in a real app you almost certainly have something there. Still digesting the rest. I'm curious why the mix of raw HTML. (Not in why it is a bad idea, but why it was felt necessary.)
  - e1g 4y ago
    In this specific case, having useCallback makes the demo code more complex and is unrelated to the actual concept being demo'ed to the reader. It's unwise to add unnecessary complexity if it doesn't add clarity. More generally, adding useCallback is even directionally wrong unless you know _exactly_ why you need it ("for identity" is OK, "for performance" is almost always misguided because the cost of creating a closure is negligible).
    - taeric 4y ago
      Wouldn't you want it to be "dependent" on whatever the source of the data is?
- eyelidlessness 4y ago
  All valid, but the thing that stood out to me most besides useCallback being weirdly inlined—and this is more important IMO—is how awkward everything around labels is. Surely there could be a base labels component that just takes `data`, or at least doesn’t require so much ceremony around the vanilla interface. The Svelte and vanilla examples are almost identical, but the Angular example looks much more like I’d expect, which strongly suggests (to me) that this is an Angular library with support for other uses bolted on as an afterthought. That’s all fine, but it probably won’t get much non-Angular adoption if there’s no further effort to make it feel somewhat more idiomatic in other environments. Even if it looks quite nice otherwise (which at a glance it does!).