As for UI. Isnt reactjs (facebook renderer library) a good fit for pedestal ?
it appears to use the same ideas of webfui. Webfui's author even complimented reacjts guys for their work: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/reactjs/conrad/reactjs/e3bYersyd64/fH83IFqXb2oJ There are a recent integration with our beloved clojurescript. https://github.com/piranha/pump An extern: https://github.com/steida/este-library/blob/master/externs/react.js And look at this Flux thing: https://github.com/cascadiajs/2013.cascadiajs.com/blob/master/a-better-way-to-structure-clientside-apps_jingc.md (Imutable structures and getting away from two way data binding) On Tuesday, November 19, 2013 5:26:52 AM UTC-2, Murtaza Husain wrote: > > > I also personally like pedestal. However couple of reasons are holding me > back - > > 1) An easier integration with UI. All current frameworks such as Angular > etc focus on easing the DOM manipulation. You define your model, and then > define the relationship of your model with the DOM. The framework then > takes care of it. > > Inversely pedestal focuses on easing the state management / event > propagation for a web app. Yes this is a big concern on big single page > apps. However most of the apps I work with, the former, DOM manipulation is > the concern that dominates. > > Thus introduction of a nice widget system, which provides facilities for > the former will go a long way to accelerate the adoption of pedestal. > > 2) Another problem is the cognitive load in developing a pedestal app. > There are too many settings, multiple ways to do the same things, concepts > that seem to overlap, lack of simple easy to grasp recipe type examples. > > I would like to have an easy way to start and develop with pedestal. There > is too much to learn before you write your first line of code, and I dont > even think I can ask a new developer to just go and learn pedestal on his > own. So please bring down the barrier. > > Hope to use pedestal on my projects soon. And a big thanks to the pedestal > team for this amazing piece of code. > > Thanks, > Murtaza > > > On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 10:44:38 AM UTC+5:30, Mars0i wrote: >> >> Thanks, Cedric, for insightful comments about documentation. >> >> I'll add that for me, if the only documentation is a video, I have to >> *really* want to learn about a programming tool to go any further. Videos >> don't allow you to take in information any faster than information at >> exactly the speed at which the video presents it. Reading lets you go >> faster, or slower, or visually decide what to skip, or find passages by >> their content. Even without hyperlinks. (Yes, when motion matters, video >> is nice.) >> >> On Monday, November 11, 2013 12:04:09 AM UTC-6, Cedric Greevey wrote: >>> >>> IMO it can often be a lack of readable, searchable, nice-to-navigate >>> text/hypertext that can be a barrier to entry. In fact all of these are >>> unfortunately common in various parts of the geekosphere: >>> >>> 1. Projects whose *only* documentation (or the only version of certain >>> key information) is in videos. Not searchable. Not easy to navigate to a >>> particular part (need to remember roughly when it is, or rewatch half the >>> thing). Expensive for mobile users with capped or per-megabyte data plans. >>> >> -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
