I'm pondering the implications of your comments, Dmitri. In Om, I have a single 
atom for my application data, but I have another atom that holds static data I 
pull from the server, for example lists for drop-down select lists. WRT local 
state, each Om component can have its own local state completely separate from 
the app data. 


On Sep 11, 2014, at 4:31 PM, Dmitri Sotnikov <[email protected]> wrote:

> So, good news is that Sean just submitted a patch for Reagent cursors a few 
> days ago. Hopefully, that will make it into the next release.
> 
> In terms of performance I would actually expect Reagent to behave better than 
> Om since it doesn't force everything into a single state atom. Reagent allows 
> easily creating local states and that makes it much easier to control what 
> nodes need to be recalculated.
> 
> If I understand it correctly, the worst case for Reagent where you use a 
> single state atom for everything is the normal case for Om.
> 
> On Thursday, September 11, 2014 2:34:25 PM UTC-4, Sean Grove wrote:
>> Bit of a sidenote, but now that the libraries are getting more mature, It'd 
>> be great to see some complex-ish apps (say, Omchaya-size or larger, but 
>> maybe even CircleCI's frontend https://github.com/circleci/frontend) for a 
>> side-by-side comparison + speed benchmarks, to get a sense of the tradeoffs 
>> as apps scale out. I'm personally curious about whether Reagent's ease of 
>> use comes with a cost at some point.
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Jamie Orchard-Hays <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>> On my project, I was using data in the form of a recursive tree--an editable 
>> one. I got stuck somewhere WRT to this in Reagent. (I wrote a question to 
>> the original developer, but he never replied.) For my purposes, Om's cursors 
>> made handling data updates trivial, so it was a big win. However, I'm sure 
>> I've put a lot more man hours in the UI development with Om than I would 
>> have with Reagent.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> So in the end, the fact that I had a recursive tree of data to work with 
>> gave Om the edge, otherwise I would have used Reagent.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I also had a look at Quiescent, but it was too thin a layer over React for 
>> what I'm doing.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Ideally, we'd have Reagent's UI simplicity combined with Om's wonderful app 
>> data handling.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Jamie
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sep 10, 2014, at 10:11 PM, Dmitri Sotnikov <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> I actually found Reagent's data handling to be very flexible. It' makes it 
>>> easy to create local states for components as well as managing the global 
>>> state using a global state atom. I'd be curious to hear what limitations 
>>> others have run into and how they could be addressed.
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> On Wednesday, September 10, 2014 11:40:13 AM UTC-4, Jamie Orchard-Hays 
>>> wrote:
>> 
>>>> I'm curious as well. I started with Reagent, but switched to Om/Sablono 
>>>> after finding Reagent's app data handling too limited for what I needed. 
>>>> The trade-off is much more to think about (complexity) when writing Om 
>>>> components.
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> Jamie
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> On Sep 9, 2014, at 3:51 AM, Daniel Kersten <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> My apologies for an off topic post in this thread - we can take it off 
>>>> list or to a separate thread if it needs more than a simple reply - 
>>>> especially since the library looks really good!
>> 
>>>> Sean could you write a little about why you switched away from Om?
>> 
>>>> I'm just trying to get a better understanding of what pros and cons Om and 
>>>> Reagent have and why Reagent is a better fit for your specific use case.  
>>>> I've seen a few people switching lately so I'm interested in hearing 
>>>> people's thoughts.
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> On 9 Sep 2014 01:01, "Sean Corfield" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>>> That looks great Dmitri! We've just made the switch from Om/Sablono to 
>>>> Reagent so this will be very handy for us I expect.
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> Sean
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> On Sep 8, 2014, at 3:05 PM, Dmitri Sotnikov <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>>> The goal of the library is to automate the process of binding form 
>>>>> elements to a document represented by a map in a Reagent atom.
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>>> https://github.com/yogthos/reagent-forms
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>>> Feedback and contributions are welcome. :)
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> --
>> 
>>>> 
>> 
>>>> 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.
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> --
>> 
>>> 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.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> 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.
> 
> -- 
> 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.

-- 
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.

Reply via email to