I graduated high school at the start of the GFC and I was pretty scared but everything turned out fine. If push comes to shove, there's always America.
Would it be bad though? A lot of APIs change in the browser space. WebRTC was broken a hundred times. Libraries depending on Prototype would probably be old, maybe insecure. You need to break it from time to time, you can't be backwards compatible all the time.
Then the two implementations would probably be incompatible (different signatures, different implementation / return values) and would cause unexpected errors down the chain. So, essentially, breaking the web and making it difficult to fix it.
If I recall the argument against Facebook here, the point is: let's assume that you found a company, file for a patent and implement it using some open source tools/libraries, also backed by Facebook. Now somewhere down the line FB decides that your product is really great and they can make something similar work for their platform, so they pour resources into developing their version of your solution. You are pissed, and take them to court - but you yourself are now in breach of licence, so before you can take them to court, you need to invest (possibly a lot of) time and resources to move away from those libraries - and in the meantime their competetive product with their whole financial baking is probably giving your little one a pounding which you may not survive.
If you hadn't had used any FB libraries in the first place and Facebook decided to copy your product, you would at least have a chance to make your case in court in a timely manner.
But I'm also from Europe and may not understand all the intricacies of US justice system, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
It might not be the same person using their libraries, might be a different business unit or a company acquiring the other or whatever. Also if I can't sue Facebook this in turns means I grant FB rights to all my parents (not legally but practically)
(Note: IANAL and am just responding to the comment knowing to little about FB's preciseice licensing)
I disagree. That's too magic for my liking. I like Laravel's routing solution where you have to manually map a route to a controller action. You can set route groups and restrict middleware to specific routes and stuff so pretty powerful!
I disagree. I think America started experiencing problems after 9/11 when they went into two expensive and unnecessary wars. Stop invading other countries and you guys can start rebuilding your own!
> what's the alternative for small-to-medium React applications that still need to store state?
I've found that with small React apps, you normally organise each component to be responsible for handling its own state.
If you need a global shared state but your app isn't large enough for Redux then lots of people pass callbacks down to child components as parameters. True story.
Yes, that's what I do. Managing the global state in the main component, setting up functions to change the state via the update helper [1] and pass these functions down to the dumb components.
I think react has a steep initial learning curve but once you grasp the concepts it's not complicated. It is more verbose than vue though and requires more setup and boilerplate to get started.
I don't think it's more complicated so much as different from what people are used to. Once you think of JSX as functional expressions, it becomes easier... and there are far fewer gotchas at play, imho.
I think react combined with a unidirectional state management has a relatively difficult initial learning curve, but overall, I find it's not as steep as say Angular is.
I disagree as soon as you write more than a single nested child/parent component, that requires a different way of thinking (should I use state or props?). And that you can't "just uses react". You kind of have to use redux (or similar) as well as a bunch of other stuff.
People keep saying you 'have to use redux' but I think that's hugely misleading to a large section of potential React users who don't need the highly complex state management that redux facilitates, and could get by just fine with setState+props.
Amen to that. Seems like everybody is cargo culting Redux but really you can get pretty far with just React plus some wrapper components to hold state.
You don't need to use redux. But it's very useful to manage state. I went from using simple components to flux to redux all in same project. For me State management is a very part of client ui.
I spent weeks learning Angular, Ember, and other last-gen frameworks. The todo equivalent was simple, but once you got into their render cycles on a moderately complex project, the wall was very steep.
I started off with simple React apps and it was easy, but I expected to hit a wall. That wall simply never comes like it did last generation. I find it interesting that someone would consider it too complex only a couple years later.
React alone in itself is pretty small library but the pieces that you put together to it (redux, react-router, react-redux, webpack/browserify) might be a big hurdle for beginners.
