- Next week, we’ll be back with a new batch of brain food, specially selected to keep your heart healthy, brain fed and intellect tuned.
- Have a great week!
Jingle bells, jingle bells, Jingle, in fact, all the way. That’s right, we love you beautiful bunch of literate people, so much, that we’ve handpicked a list of top 10 development-related articles…
Continue reading “Top 10 dev articles over the past week – JetRuby”
- with mobx, at least the way I’m using it, you can generally get away with just passing in the relevant model, You keep ending up with situations where you pass your ProductList model into your ProductList component, which maps over the Product models it contains and passes them into a component called Product.
- With mobx, you add some new observers and (optionally) some actions to change those observers and…
- 3) On a related note, redux really needs data to be normalized; you end up devoting a remarkable amount of time to normalizing data (using normalizr or whatever) and then de-normalizing it in your components to handel relations properly, and then figuring out how to modify your normalized state tree in your reducers based on actions triggered in your denormalized component tree.
- 4) Closely related to the last two points, components written with redux in mind often end up with very extensive lists of props, because they end up needing a little bit of data from six different reducers, plus a dozen action creators.
- 2) Redux has some very specific ways it wants you to structure your project, and some of them are quite good.
(Disclaimer: We use React to incrementally replace/upgrade pages and panels in a very large admin console. So we have a ton of very small apps that share a lot of concepts, but are still distinct apps. Obviously this multiplies the amount of boilerplate we have to deal with compared to if we were using a single “monolithic” SPA.)
Continue reading “I grumpily ignored the comments about mobx for a while, then finally broke and u…”