On Friday, April 4, 2014 12:25:53 AM UTC+3, David Nolen wrote: > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Sean Corfield <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > In the case of application state being modified "externally", would you > recommend having an invisible Om component listen for those changes and apply > them through transact! itself? Or is the approach of just swapping in a delta > considered fully supported and "recommended"? > > > > (given the discussions I've been having with you on IRC and from my only > playing with Om, I'd lean toward the former, but the latter is certainly > "simpler") > > > > Sean > > > "Invisible" components in Om are fully supported. This is precisely the idea > behind om-sync, a reusable synchronization controller component which has no > visual representation. > > > > I recommend the former approach. Using swap! is not something I recommend at > all. > > > David
How would you guys recommend to do pushState route changes. Would be cool to do in an om component but i'd imagine route changes need to be transacted to application state after the event happens in order to support back/forward buttons. -- Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ClojureScript" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.
