Hi Dany, El mar., 30 abr. 2019 a las 5:55, Dany Dhondt (<archeme...@mac.com.invalid>) escribió:
> Hi Justin, > > As much as I would like to write an article on Royale vs. competitors, I > can’t do so at this moment because I don’t have enough Royale knowledge > yet. But there are things I could point at so that the Royale team can > formulate answers. > Here are some questions and ideas I have which could be addressed: > > 1. Royale blog > On our site, there is a section called ‘blog’. Shouldn’t we rename that? > To me, a blog is something of the past. ‘Examples’ or ‘Code snippets’ or > something similar would be better. > I'm ok with this, but we must get the right word. Currently we use "blog" for: * announcements and notify releases * articles * examples (ala Peter Dehaan's flex blog examples style) So "Examples" is not right to me since we are posting announcements, while articles could be a more elaborated writing about some concept that could have examples. I'm ok to change it if others want if we found a label more generic and modern > > 2. Faq > We definitely need a faq. Common answers to basic questions can go there. > Also, when our StackOverflow database gets rolling, we can put links to our > faq there. > Yeah! I thought on this too. This could be a good point to work on. There's already a page (link on footer), with some points a put when created the page. Making a good FAQ page would be great. And there's many things and sections we can add to it. This maybe could be a good point for you to start if you want > > 3. (Re)rendering > One of the core principles of React is that it uses a virtual dom. You > never write to the dom directly. React does that for you. That’s why JQuery > doesn’t match at all with React. The main advantage of this, is that only > those DOM nodes get updated which actually change, making React really > fast. How does Royale tackle this? Can someone explain this in an easy to > understand way? > I think Harbs explained this, but maybe we should have a more compressive data about this. Maybe if Harbs is very busy right now Alex could give us a paragraph or something about this. For what I understand Royale is more fast than React, but don't have the proper words or concepts ready to explain this in a more technical way. > 4. Managing (global) state > Updating a component in React is done by calling setState() and passing an > object to that method. That’s all very well and simple in small projects. > Passing state from parents to children is straightforward. You just pass > in state as props to underlying components. The other way around though is > hard, very hard. Handling global state is done by implementing 3rd party > technologies like Redux, MobX or recently by implementing React hooks. > I believe that Royale binding mechanisms could be superior to this. So the > question here: how does Royale handles global sta > I think you refer here how to deal with global models in apps in opposite to models of single components. In flex we had frameworks like Swiz, Parsley and more. In Royale PureMVC is already working, although for example I'm not using it in out real app yet. But I think this is what you have right now to use as today. We plan to make a new library based on metadata to mimic the most important functionality that we had in Swiz, I refer to [Dispatcher], [EventDispatcher] and [Inject] This is a requisite for our next real app iteration, but still can say when will start to wok on that, only can say that hopefully will be soon and will be donated to Apache Royale > > 5. Justin, at some point in your message, you talk about ‘command line > nonsense’. I believe you’re right and wrong at the same time. > Right because indeed, learning React is far more than learning one > technology. You have to dig through npm, node, JSX, typescript (if you want > strong typing), webpack/rollup, babel, … and in the end, most of us use > create-react-app just to hide all those configurations. BUT > Wrong because there is a massive open source community where you can find > almost anything you might need in your project. Building a modern web app > is all about combining existing code to create your application. > That brings me to this question: is it possible to embed existing pure > javascript components into Royale? > yes! I think I need to make soon a blog example about this. For example in Tour de Jewel, the code coloring is done by another JS script calling its methods. Other way is wrapping in Royale classes like we did with Material Design Lite (MDL UI set). I think there's more with typedefs, but I need to learn more from this. I'll ask Alex/Harbs to explain more about this. > An example: one of the most crucial components in any admin application is > a calendar. In my Flex days, I had to spend hundreds of dollars to get a > decent calendar component. In React, I use fullcalendar which is a great > calendar/sheduling javascript component. Creating a calendar component from > scratch takes years as anyone who has tried will confirm. > Yeah, it took some work to get Jewel DateChooser fully working, and a Calendar component done in Royale will be work. Maybe is better to use other third party one for now. But in the end we should try to create our own versions that will grow with time. > 6. Components, components, components, … > As I stated before, embracing a new application technology involves the > immediate availability of standard components. PAYG architecture, beads and > strands is all very powerful, but as a developer new to Royale, I’d want > ready-to-use, powerful, beautiful components which interoperate seamlessly. > Yes, Jewel tries to create components that could be easily be visual customized, with themes mainly and by CSS in the specific case. So we need to work more on the official Jewel themself and create some more that shows how different it could be from one to another just by creating your own styles, and in the other hand we should create more Jewel components that tries to bring all possibilities, and incorporate to Royale Jewel library or make other expansion libraries... > > Just some random thoughts… > > > Dany > > -- > Carlos Rovira > http://about.me/carlosrovira > > > >
