Is it Ember/Vue-style "mutate, observe, compute" as implied by most of their example code or Flux-style as implied by their introduction visualization (https://github.com/mobxjs/mobx/raw/6ed404b96a8b4074a473accd2...)? Do I create actions or just mutate state directly (again, visualization and some text in the readme vs examples)? How is "observer turns React (function) components into derivations of the data they render." any different from just plain React components?
MobX feels like someone tried to make an easy state management solution (obviously a great goal) and in the process just threw together whatever pattern exist out there right now. It obviously works for many people, considering how often someone comments about it on HN, but I wonder what makes those user stick with React vs a framework that completely embraces this approach like Vue or Ember.
Is it some hard requirement on React?(EDIT: Or maybe preference of JSX?)
Nuclear-js feels heavy-handed, and there is indeed a lot of boiler plate, but in the end the explicit organization pays off in a huge way.
What most people don't realize is that state management will get insane past a certain point. Nuclear-JS can handle a truly massive application that is very complex -- think google docs/sheets
I imagine most people aren't building something like that though, and find it too cumbersome.
.. i'm also told that, if all you're doing is rendering templates, you might not need anything more than hyperx (a substack production).