[nateabele]

Every OS project README needs 2 sections: Purpose, where it explains what it is and why, and Prior Art, where it explains what came before, and how the project improves on / differs from them.

With time at such a premium, that is by far the most valuable information you could possibly communicate. I wouldn't even be bothered by having to read comments/unit tests to figure out how the thing works if you just tell me why I should care in the first place.

[choward]

Exactly. Without all explaining all of this, the rest of the documentation is completely worthless.

> To quote a member of the React core team at Facebook: > Inferno 1.0 is really well written. It's how I would've rewritten React. I'd recommend reading its source to learn.

So fking what? You want me to read the source to try to decypher why I would want to use your new immature library? Another question is 'who is the target audience?'. It appears to be current react developers. However, I see no compelling reason why a react developer would want to switch. There are some cool benchmark numbers and file size stats, but so what? That's not affecting me.

The only thing that pops out as maybe being the "killer" feature is the isomorphic rendering. But I see no examples of this and have no idea how much of a pain it is to set up. The README for it is utterly worthless https://www.npmjs.com/package/inferno-server.

In summary, all I want to know is: Why as a current web developer who is comfortable with my relatively mature stack and ecosystem around it would I even consider your immature, non-battle tested project?

[trueadm]

note: I'm the author of Inferno.

If you're comfortable with what you have right now. I don't expect you to switch to Inferno. If you're happy with your app, it works great, it's performance is where you want it and your team/company love it – you'd be mad to switch to something because you saw it posted on Hacker News.

Inferno isn't here to make your life hard, it's giving you an opportunity to use it when the time might be right – like when you may have issues with performance on mobile (the primary reason why I created Inferno in the first place).

I also wrote Inferno so other authors of other libraries and tools could borrow the ideas in Inferno and further improve what they're trying to do. Open-source is great in that it allows us to share ideas in that way and I'd love to see other frameworks like React, Vue, Angular etc push the boundaries of performance even further.

[choward]

> like when you may have issues with performance on mobile (the primary reason why I created Inferno in the first place)

That's exactly what I was looking for. The motivation. I only see mobile mentioned once in the README and it's regarding file size. I didn't understand that was the main reason for this project. Maybe you could make that more clear.

[trueadm]

Will definitely do that. README writing is like an entirely different skill in itself to be honest. I'm not great at it :/

[HugoDaniel]

I switched to Inferno recently after 2 years on React. Congrats for the amazing project, it truly makes a difference in mobile and even on pcs.

[faceyspacey]

It seems with webpack you could alias inferno to react and start using it without many code changes, especially for projects that made a focus of using functional components. Am I wrong here? What are the main hurdles you see in doing this? What React features and common libraries would we have to forgo? Would recompose continue to work with it?

[trueadm]

You can use ES2015 classes too and `inferno-compat` will try to support everything that React 15.4 currently supports. Recompose should work fine too, as should most common libraries. If you run into issues, please let the Inferno team know and we can investigate why. :)