On Thursday, November 27, 2014 8:42:47 PM UTC+1, Dein Diener wrote: > Hi, i am new to clojurescript and want to build a small webapp with it to > learn. I took a detailed look at the todo sample-app of 1. om and 2. > quiescent and found the second one (quiescent) easier to understand... so i > would like to go with quiescent. But aware of the fact, that Om is much > "bigger"... my question is: what does Om have that quiescent misses ? Thanks > ;)
Om has stateful components, just like Reagent and React itself. Quiescent only uses the React virtual DOM. Quiescent does not store state in React components. All UI-state is stored outside React using e.g. Clojurescript atoms. This is why Quiescent is easier to understand. AFAICT there is nothing that Om can do which Quiescent misses. -- 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.
