On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 11:19 PM, Yosuke Torii <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm curious what makes it sound that way, since as you noted, that is not >> the point I'm making. >> > > I don't know if others feels like me or not. But at least for me, "no > components" sounds a bit confusing (it is in official guide too). > I view it as destructive so, you're not alone in seeing something not OK with that. > Also, "no components, no nesting TEA" does not answer the problem > discussed here. So how can we do instead? Maybe introducing sortable-table > pattern is more constructive for this discussion. I think it is a variant > of TEA, managing its own state, but still keeping the form of "reusable > *view*". So great! > the sortable table is a clever component that pushed the external call to update inside the view. You still need what used to be the ChildMsg tag but now instead of calling the Child.update and saving the state it receives the updated state and just saves it. Other than the update trick, it's more or less the same thing as the old MUV triplets. You can even use the pattern to do nesting. The problem is that this approach makes it impossible (as far as I could see) to implement the components that need side effects (like the old RandomGif list) -- There is NO FATE, we are the creators. blog: http://damoc.ro/ -- 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.
