What do you mean by "intimately knowing data changes"? Arguably Flux hides that from components, no?
-
-
Replying to @dmnd_
Theoretically, it seems you end up with sCUs that check the values you care about, or you have multiple stores you listen to.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @ryanflorence @dmnd_
sCU is a shell game. Since it needs to know something about all of your descendents, any strategy that wormholes breaks encapsulation.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Redux works because it knows about all data changes. Introduce any side channel and you break its sCU. Flux doesn't work because 1/
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
there's no way to teach an ancestor sCU about the days dependency. 2/2
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I’m a bit confused about this conversation. I haven’t seen people implement sCU by hand except corner cases. Use shallow checks instead.
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @dan_abramov @wycats and
Same with mobx. Never write sCU kn any project
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @KatSickk @dan_abramov and
Yep. Because those tools are paying the piper for you with a consistent model of read/write. Flux isn't.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats @dan_abramov and
Agreed. In classic Flux there is no way to track prev/next values
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @KatSickk @dan_abramov and
Mobx and Redux address the issue I'm talking about but make mixing and matching hard. Glimmer's approach tries to make that better 1/
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
But perhaps YAGNI? 2/2
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.