On Friday, March 20, 2015 at 9:29:44 AM UTC+11, Karl Guertin wrote: > By my understanding, the core pattern is a flux variation. Differences from > Facebook's original flux pattern: > > There's only one store and it's a global ratom. > > You can compute views from the root store or other derived views using > Reagent's reaction feature. > > > Your handlers are expected to be wrapped using a middleware pattern to handle > cross-cutting concerns.
Given the question, that's a good summary! But I'd be cautious about the value of the question. Looking at re-frame from the Flux perspective is like looking at a cone from the side elevation and seeing a triangle. The view is only useful up to a point. I'm sure you know that, but I just wanted to draw the point out. To me, the Elm Architecture provides a more interesting perspective, than Flux. And from what Facebook said at reactconf, they appear to be heading in the "derived data all the way down" kinda direction themselves. The data from declarative queries flowing via Relay/GraphQL into components. Etc, etc. -- Mike -- 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.
