Fork me on GitHub
#rum
<
2017-01-02
>
niwinz08:01:35

I have using this one approach https://github.com/funcool/potok

niwinz08:01:46

that is much simplier that reframe and carry but offers almost all that you going to need...

martinklepsch08:01:25

@niwinz nice re potok, that’s the stuff from uxbox, right?

niwinz08:01:41

after some time of usage and polishing

niwinz08:01:49

I have decided to extract it to a library

martinklepsch08:01:36

I’m a but cautious to pull in beicon/promesa/bluebird and all that but I’ll consider for a thing I’m currently working on

martinklepsch08:01:01

@niwinz mostly just not much experience with reactive stream stuff and it seems like a heavy dependency

niwinz08:01:36

ah, understand! it make sense

martinklepsch08:01:16

@jwr BTW, the gist above uses re-frame (as you’ll see) but the form library itself is pretty much agnostic to that

niwinz08:01:00

nice, I follow the development of derivatives (I'm watching it :P)

martinklepsch08:01:12

well then 🙂

niwinz08:01:28

very nice work!

martinklepsch09:01:27

@jwr I’m sending messages from the Slack #rum room which are bi-directionally bridged into Gitter and Riot via Matrix

martinklepsch14:01:01

@jwr that’s fair. I wanted to see how it works when bridging Gitter <> Slack <> Matrix and the Gitter integration is the one that is most interruptive in terms of how it looks to other users. Maybe we should disable that bridge again and only continue using the Matrix <> Slack bridge.

martinklepsch14:01:24

@jwr have you by any chance taken a look at the Riot client (as linked above)?

nooga22:01:06

has anyone attempted to marry rum with inferno instead of react?

kenny23:01:59

@nooga We have thought about it at my company. You would need to write a pluggable version of Sablono.

nooga23:01:28

are there significant differences?

kenny23:01:38

Between Inferno and React?

nooga23:01:32

> Inferno allows people to switch their existing React projects to Inferno in a few lines of code using inferno-compat

nooga23:01:11

this line from their readme made me wonder

kenny23:01:47

https://github.com/infernojs/inferno#createelement-package-inferno-create-element. It’s very similar. I never dove super deep because we didn’t have a strong enough push for it.

kenny23:01:54

With a pluggable version of Sablono you would be able to use any framework you like. e.g. https://github.com/skatejs/skatejs, https://github.com/google/incremental-dom, Inferno, etc.

kenny23:01:45

The reason I was thinking Sablono would have to be pluggable instead of writing a wrapper for React’s API is to account for framework differences. With incremental DOM you have the ability to specify static attributes, so you would probably want a way to specify that via hiccup.

nooga23:01:10

yeah, that would be neat

kenny23:01:17

I think it would be incredibly powerful

kenny23:01:27

Theoretically, you would be able to mix and match the different frameworks. It’s not clear if a use-case for that would exist (maybe wanting to re-use React components inside an Inferno/SkateJS/etc app), but I think it would be possible.

nooga23:01:04

awesome idea

nooga23:01:28

especially now, when there are new framweworks every week

kenny23:01:12

Very true 😬

nooga23:01:00

porting your humongous project from one lib to a new one in 5 minutes would blew js people heads off 😄

kenny23:01:47

Totally. It would just take some thought to make sure you got it right. It’s possible you would need to completely re-write sablono to be pluggable from the ground up.

nooga23:01:12

I think I’m going to research this on the weekend