On Friday, 1 March 2019 at 13:26:58 UTC, Olivier FAURE wrote:
Would the author be interested in structural level-feedback? As in, not "I wish there was this feature", but "I think the way you're doing X and Y is wrong, and the project would probably benefit from a complete refactoring".

I realize this kind of feedback is pretty irritating to get and hard to act on several months into the project, hence why I'm asking.

Maybe. But in the beginning no one is willing to give it :)

I am very much interested in qualitative feedback on spasm's internals and its design. It is the main reason I announced the project. I am completely willing to overhaul each and every line if that benefits the project.

The short version is, it's pretty clear Sebastiaan has designed spasm with the goal of giving the library compile-time information on the structure of the widgets to render, to avoid React's superfluous updates and prop comparison; that said, I think it's possible to give the library that information without losing React's "your components are all functions, don't worry about how the data is updated" simplicity, which I think is an area where spasm comes up short.

That would be awesome. I initially tried very hard to stick to React/JSX functional rendering. I could not find a way to make it a zero-cost abstraction, but maybe you have more success!

Reply via email to