(no title)
Alex-C137 | 4 months ago
Subjectively I am extremely in opposition to the fact that XML anything with composable functions is more intuitive than HTML templates by any stretch of the imagination.
Alex-C137 | 4 months ago
Subjectively I am extremely in opposition to the fact that XML anything with composable functions is more intuitive than HTML templates by any stretch of the imagination.
gloosx|4 months ago
recursive|4 months ago
That makes sense, but that's not what react does. Components are functions of their "prop"s. The rest of the state comes from a memoized cache in a fiber. Which fiber? That's determined from a reconciliation algorithm. Does it do the right thing? Usually.
You can tell if it's "a function of state" by whether the state is in the parameter list.
jakubmazanec|4 months ago
Hard disagree. React became popular because it was much better than its predecessors like Backbone, and also better than its contemporaries like the first Angular. I was still learning JavaScript, when I was doing a browser app for my thesis, and I used Backbone as a framework. Awful experience, using React was much more intuitive. While Backbone was imperative, React was declarative, with composable components, no custom HTML template syntax. Using React made web development fun for me.
> extremely in opposition to the fact that XML anything with composable functions is more intuitive than HTML templates
And I hate HTML templates. I think there are just two groups with different preferences and therefore it's somewhat useless to argue about this stuff.
Alex-C137|4 months ago
I like to argue about it because I like knowing why people think the way they do about React. I'm a long-time React hater and still look for ways to change my mind, so there's a point for me I guess?