3 ms·
Yep the Ember team also seem to have come to the same conclusion on 2-way bindings. My dumb takeaway is something like '2-way bindings demo well but are rarely
by nilliams 12y ago
Yep the Ember team also seem to have come to the same conclusion on 2-way bindings.
My dumb takeaway is something like '2-way bindings demo well but are rarely what you actually want in real apps'.
I think (not 100% sure) Tom & Yehuda (of Ember) talk about how they became disenfranchised with 2-way bindings in their recent Changelog podcast episode on Ember 2 [1].
[1] http://thechangelog.com/131/ http://thechangelog.com/131/
- danabramov 12y agoI think marketing is also a problem here. Even frameworks that realize shortcomings of two-way bindings feel compelled to support them because it's hard to educate newcomers to abandon their old ways. “Two” looks better than “one” on a feature checklist. Quoting Sebastian Markbåge from React, “Angular is intuitively better to most engineers based on previous experience and ideals. React is better in practice. This is a biased opinion, but based one large org's experience of trying both models extensively.”
- davej 12y agoTwo-way data binding is not inherently a bad idea. In fact, it's awesome in many cases, especially forms and form-like elements. The problem is that people have a habit of misusing them and start using two-way bindings where they should be using events or similar patterns.
- blktiger 12y agoIf I remember correctly, the Ember team isn't planning on abandoning two-way bindings. They simply want to give the developer control on when to use two-way bindings and they are going to make one-way bindings the default. That way you can decide if you need live updates or if data-flow control is better.