3 ms·

Wow. This dude got really hung-up on the name 'React' (assuming that had to do with reactive programming). His summary of 'React sucks at reactive programming

Wow. This dude got really hung-up on the name 'React' (assuming that had to do with reactive programming). His summary of 'React sucks at reactive programming' is ... true? It also kind of misses the point. The React team clearly states their design goals here: https://facebook.github.io/react/ https://facebook.github.io/react/ ... and they have nothing to do with reactive programming.

muraiki 12y ago
Apparently my submission of this was a repost -- the author commented on the original post saying: "Presentation author here. I should have taken this down before it popped up on HN or elsewhere. The video of this presentation is worth watching, because it's tongue-in-cheek through-out. But the slides are not worth reading, otherwise people take it seriously like it's happening here now. Cycle isn't the solution to everything, it's just one guy's ongoing experiment." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8819422 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8819422 Anyways, I found the ideas interesting because I think that its use of Reactive Extensions solves a variety of frontend problems elegantly (and Rx works on backend problems too, making it even more compelling). I made a jsfiddle that explains a bit about Rx to hopefully provide enough context for "why would you use this?" http://jsfiddle.net/nmd88wum/ http://jsfiddle.net/nmd88wum/ Anyways, sorry for the respost, and sorry to the author for dragging up something he apparently didn't want being dragged up again. :(
waltfy 12y ago
Agreed. Although I do think that React is "borrowing" concepts from FRP, definitely. Funny how he points the VirtualDOM as if that's THE reason why React is good. It is not. I wrote about why I think you should use React here: http://waltfy.net/2015/04/01/one-reason-to-use-react.html http://waltfy.net/2015/04/01/one-reason-to-use-react.html
kaonashi 12y ago
React doesn't try to do 'Reactive' programming structures; it does a view layer that's composable. How that data gets into the components is your responsibility; you can easily use something like Baconjs/RxJS to do this.

muraiki 12y ago

Apparently my submission of this was a repost -- the author commented on the original post saying: "Presentation author here. I should have taken this down before it popped up on HN or elsewhere. The video of this presentation is worth watching, because it's tongue-in-cheek through-out. But the slides are not worth reading, otherwise people take it seriously like it's happening here now. Cycle isn't the solution to everything, it's just one guy's ongoing experiment." https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8819422 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8819422 Anyways, I found the ideas interesting because I think that its use of Reactive Extensions solves a variety of frontend problems elegantly (and Rx works on backend problems too, making it even more compelling). I made a jsfiddle that explains a bit about Rx to hopefully provide enough context for "why would you use this?" http://jsfiddle.net/nmd88wum/ http://jsfiddle.net/nmd88wum/ Anyways, sorry for the respost, and sorry to the author for dragging up something he apparently didn't want being dragged up again. :(

waltfy 12y ago

Agreed. Although I do think that React is "borrowing" concepts from FRP, definitely. Funny how he points the VirtualDOM as if that's THE reason why React is good. It is not. I wrote about why I think you should use React here: http://waltfy.net/2015/04/01/one-reason-to-use-react.html http://waltfy.net/2015/04/01/one-reason-to-use-react.html

kaonashi 12y ago

React doesn't try to do 'Reactive' programming structures; it does a view layer that's composable. How that data gets into the components is your responsibility; you can easily use something like Baconjs/RxJS to do this.