It's easier to say: code shared between client and the server
than isomorphic and have everyone understand you. Isomorphic means a lot of different things to different people. Say what you mean, and more people will be able to take part and understand :) On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 3:24 PM, 'Rupert Smith' via Elm Discuss <[email protected]> wrote: > On Monday, January 9, 2017 at 1:55:08 PM UTC, Joel McCracken wrote: >>> >>> It was very, very nice. It allows for seemless APIs that simplified >>> the code sharing a whole bunch. >> >> >> Oh? My impression was that you thought this wasn't worth it, based upon >> comments here >> https://github.com/noredink/take-home#should-i-use-this-in-production and >> IIRC what I've read elsewhere. >> >> Incidentally, I also hate the term isomorphic for shared client-server >> code. > > > From the wikipedia page for isomorphism: > > "The interest of isomorphisms lies in the fact that two isomorphic objects > cannot be distinguished by using only the properties used to define > morphisms; thus isomorphic objects may be considered the same as long as one > considers only these properties and their consequences." > > Which sounds like a reasonable way to describe when the rendered page is > exactly the same, whether it is rendered client side or server side. As I > understand it though, it often means that some elements of the server side > rendering may be ommitted or only mocked up. Particularly interactive > elements that just won't work with a full server round trip, but will work > asm interactice UI components on the client side. > > Also, I think describing what I am trying to do with my editing mode as > 'progressive enhancement' isn't quite right either. I think the concept > behind progressive enhancement is that you start with you baseline client; > perhpas you even have to support some old version of IE, or users who will > not have javascript enabled in their browser. You code for that in the main, > but add capabilities that better browsers/environments can take advantage > of, if they are available. > > Not sure why you don't like isomorphism, has the word been poisened by too > may javascript libraries? > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Elm Discuss" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
