News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Application Architecture with React: Rethinking Flux by dominotw on Monday September 14, 2015 @11:20AM (#10215493)
I recently got rid of redux, react-router, immutablejs ect

from my reactjs app. I can't believe how much simpler my app got.

There is a lot of architecture astronautism going on in js world right now. Just be skeptical of it.

Re:Application Architecture with React: Rethinking Flux by tajano on Monday September 14, 2015 @02:20PM (#10216528)
I'm curious to know how complex your React app is.

I'm just starting to integrate Redux (and possibly Immutable) into my app, and initially I'm a bit surprised by how Redux can make simple things much more complex. I'm hoping it will pay off by end up simplifying complex things down the road.

In any case, it feels like we're currently at the "peak of inflated expectations" with respect to React and Flux/Redux.

Re:Application Architecture with React: Rethinking Flux by LePetitDev on Monday September 14, 2015 @11:34AM (#10215568)
After getting rid of redux, what did you end up using for your data-model needs?
Re:Application Architecture with React: Rethinking Flux by iLoch on Monday September 14, 2015 @11:39AM (#10215596)
That sounds like a ton of work for any moderately sized application. It also seems like it would have diminishing returns as your app gets bigger, as that's when these architectures start to get useful. I have to be skeptical that your app has gotten simpler. If you've decided to drop the Flux pattern entirely then I can see your argument, because if you can do that then you probably didn't need to be using it in the first place. However I don't see this as a shortcoming of Redux or Flux. It just means they don't need to be used in every scenario, which should be implied.
Re:Application Architecture with React: Rethinking Flux by sotojuan on Monday September 14, 2015 @06:37PM (#10217970)
I agree about react-router and Immutable.js, but redux is tiny and the cognitive load is minimal.