[recursive]

Another react hater here. Here are some of my beefs.

  * Components don't have exposed identities, but component state is based on identity.  Secretly they're fibers.
  * Everything is treated as if it's immutable.  Reference equality is used to infer no changes.  Working with array-based state, or almost anything really, is awkward and unnecessarily verbose.  Spread all the things.
  * The rules of hooks.  These are just implementation constraints based on the rest of the design decisions of react.
  * You can't use symbols as keys.  This is small, but particularly irksome for me.
  * The smallest unit of UI change is the component render function.
  * Effect dependencies need to be listed explicitly.

There are more.

[apsurd]

> Everything is treated as if it's immutable [...]

Immutability is a great callout; frontend ecosystem is quite divisive on it.

For my flavor, as React exploded, redux and the advanced state management frameworks came and made everything bananas[1]. "It solves real problems for advanced apps"; maybe but I could never shake that these problems are self-inflicted.

There's a mathematical functional purity that's nerd-snipe worthy; but reactivity with mutation observers just seems to model the real world of UIs better.

Anyway, https://mobx.js.org/README.html is the exact opposite take: mutate your state! Subscribe to changes to your heart's content.

The divisiveness is real, it's what makes staying up to date exhausting.

[1] Come on, no one seriously thinks "bind action creators" made intuitive, ergonomic sense.

[recursive]

Mobx is cool. Nice to see some other mutation enjoyers. I also made my own thing[1] called "mutraction" (portmanteau of "mutate" and "tracking") based on this premise that uses jsx and mutation. I mostly made it prove that it could be made and to understand how it would work.

[1] https://github.com/tomtheisen/mutraction