Hacker News Reader

Comment by flaviojuvenal | Hacker News Reader

It's been less than 6 months I first heard about Redux. Looking at its issues, it seems to be a little more than 1 year old. Now everyone is talking about MobX. Why not improving Redux in first place? If it's verbose, why not writing more abstractions on top of it to make it easier to use? IMHO we should think more about those questions before writing another framework-of-the-day.

View on HN

Mobx has been around for a while but it's just less well known due to developer relations. In my experience, Redux is great but requires a lot of work to get started, or abstractions. People have made quite a lot of open source projects to solve these issues for different use cases but it looks like Dan and other developers want to keep Redux core very simple so I would not expect any opinionated abstractions to land in the core.

Mobx on the otherhand is "batteries included" and doesn't require much extra code to get started. We're using Mobx in production and only packages we needed to install were `mobx` and `mobx-react` along with some babel extensions. Very simple and increases developer efficiency by a mile not to mention onboarding time...

There's definitely a lot of abstractions being written on top of Redux. Some of them stay with Redux's conventions, others try to take it in a very different philosophical direction. My Redux addons catalog lists just about everything out there: https://github.com/markerikson/redux-ecosystem-links .

The strategy of MobX is different. It's not easily possible to make Redux work like how MobX does it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com