You don't learn anything by studying other architectures?

For even more fun, compare with inferno

FWIW a React lead said Inferno is how they would've designed React if they had to do it from scratch, and it's author joined Facebook to push React efforts forward.

So does that mean inferno is both theoretically better and already dead? :(

Hehe. I think it's Open Source at play: X publishes an innovative method, Y iterates with a cleaner version benefiting from lessons-learnt, X says "awesome, let's join forces!" and they live together happily thereafter. Inferno passed over to another lead who's pushing it forward.

IMO this is a good outcome: there is some marginal value in yet another "React-like but faster" library, but the same energy could help a lot more people if applied directly to the source of the madness.

"Inferno 1.0 is really well written. It's how I would've rewritten React. I'd recommend reading its source to learn." - reading the source is much more effective than reading an article written by someone who read the source code.

What are you doing on HN when you could be off reading source code?

I don't think that your question makes any sense. I read both of HN and the source code.

And people can read both the article and the source code.

this's the answer.

This is very specific architecture for a very specific product. I really don't think that I can learn anything from all these UML diagrams. I was just wondering what the author had in mind.

Still not really a UML diagram. It's a flow chart. Of course if javascript programmers encapsulated things with actual objects then maybe UML would be applicable.

flow chart != UML activity diagram?