4 ms·
> I dunno, I used Redux for a few years, and it was a "pretty tedious and error-prone amount of work in complex web apps" too. This makes no sense. Redux is ex
by ZephyrBlu 3y ago
> I dunno, I used Redux for a few years, and it was a "pretty tedious and error-prone amount of work in complex web apps" too.
This makes no sense. Redux is extremely simple with a very small API. If the code using it is tedious and error-prone, that's the fault of the people who wrote that code not Redux.
E.g. "everything must be an action and have an associated reducer" is nothing to do with Redux itself.
- Sammi 3y agoIs this a parody? Redux splits things up that belong together. Redux makes you write more code. Of course it's more complex. Even it's creator advised that you probably don't need it.
- ZephyrBlu 3y ago> Even it's creator advised that you probably don't need it. This is my whole point. Redux in itself is not complex. The elaborate flows people create with it are complex. It's not Redux's fault that you're using it when you shouldn't be.
- Sammi 3y agoStore, selector, reducer, dispatch, action... Redux is concept overload. It's abstractions on top of abstractions on top of abstractions... It makes simple things complex.
- coldtea 3y agoIf you liked Redux, you'll love the old J2EE!