Any reason why you wanted to have a wrapper to React? freactive doesn't seem to be a wrapper, although functionality might be similar.
Anyway, thx - I'm thinking of using them both for a real (but small) for-fun project. Might be the only way find out :). I'll keep in touch. Op dinsdag 14 april 2015 17:24:42 UTC+2 schreef Alan Moore: > I tried them both and they are equally viable for most projects. In my case I > was looking for the thinnest possible wrapper to React - and I don't use > *any* of the ratom or other state tracking features so my use requirements > are a bit out of the mainstream. I just needed a view layer. > > I ended up with Rum for this reason but it was very much a toss up. I found I > could understand the code base slightly better and liked the simplicity of > the mixin support. I also found an example of integrating Datascript with Rum > (same author) that was helpful because I had to integrate a similar data > engine. > > Freactive might be a better choice if you have a lot of animations - I seem > to remember that it has explicit support for it... TBD. Let us know how you > get on with whatever you choose. > > Good luck. -- 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 clojurescript+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to clojurescript@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.
