This is closed but i still like reflux for its simplicity

@ChaosD It seems like Reflux misses some important characteristics of the Flux architecture: Can you dispatch actions in a predefined order with Reflux? Make sure that all the actions are dispatched synchronously (the next action dispatching does not start before finishing dispatching of a previous one)? Can a single action creator / method dispatch more than one action at a time (a couple of different actions)?

Be warned, I most certainly cannot answer your questions in a satisfying way because I'am just getting started with react.
I like the simplicity because it seems to streamline the whole process a bit more (maybe too much for you) and makes it easier for me to get started with. What i got so far is, that its possible to order your "dispatching", quoting the readme here:

waitFor is replaced in favor to handle serial and parallel data flows:

• Aggregate data stores (mentioned above) may listen to other stores in serial
• Joins for joining listeners in parallel

I could not find anything about action creators dispatching multiple actions but since actions dispatch themselves, i imagine you could simply call multiple actions to get what you need. I'am not quite sure if I got you right here but i cannot imagine a situation where this might be required. Could you elaborate?

These articles seem to address some of your concerns and helped me a lot understanding reflux:

• http://blog.krawaller.se/posts/react-js-architecture-flux-vs-reflux/ (basic info)
• http://spoike.ghost.io/deconstructing-reactjss-flux/ (probably your answers)

Have you reopened this issue for further discussion or are you already considering reflux? I'd love to hear your opinion about it because I'am also about to make this decision.

I just studied the flux docs again and it seems that you are right. if you want to stick to flux as close as possible, reflux might not be the best bet. Fluxxor is new to me, thanks for pointing me there. I will definitely check it out.

I played a bit with Fluxxor and it convinced me. It is really better if you do not want to be led astray from the Flux pattern.
What do you think about McFly?

Maybe it is time to rename the issue... ;)

Try https://github.com/deloreanjs/delorean which we build and it's too
simple.
7 Kas 2014 09:05 tarihinde "ChaosD" notifications@github.com yazdı:

I played a bit with Fluxxor and it convinced me. It is really better if
you do not want to be led astray from the Flux pattern.
Have you seen McFly? http://kenwheeler.github.io/mcfly/

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#22 (comment)
.

@f , in what way Delorean is different to the previously mentioned? How does it handle the concerns @koistya mentioned with reflux?

Btw, I really love how so many Back To The Future themed libs pop up so fast! :D

A nice summary can be found here:
https://reactjsnews.com/the-state-of-flux/

I personally settled for Fluxxor. I think it's the perfect blend between vanilla flux and reduced boilerplate and you can further reduce it with custom mixins. If the project ever dies, it would be easy to migrate. It's a non negligible advantage if you're in react for the long term.

one more to consider...
https://github.com/arqex/fluxify

I don't see compelling reason why to use Dispatcher. I prefer Reflux, it's simpler and cleaner.

I'm personally using https://github.com/goatslacker/alt

FWIW, a bunch of the links to the npm packages (from the images) go to the wrong packages.

If the goal is for the application to be isomorphic, you should look into our Fluxible library. We're using store instances instead of singletons to avoid concurrency issues that you'd see on the server when doing isomorphic.

@mridgway, but that adds complexity... Have you tried the other way around - keep using singletons, but make sure that each server-side rendering operation (HTTP request) uses a separate JavaScript execution environment?

You have two options if you want to use a separate environment: use a separate node process for rendering each request or using node's vm module. Neither of these options will give you very good scalability.

We haven't found that it adds that much complexity at all. In fact, it makes it easier to test stores because you don't have to worry about side effects between tests. You can see an implementation of Fluxible in our flux-examples or our docs site.

@mridgway what about rendering React app directly with V8 without Node's overhead?

I came to post about this exact thing and found this discussion.

alt gives you lots of flexibility in terms of isomorphism, you can keep your stores as singletons without using vm or you can take the fluxible approach and create instances of flux and pass it around your react components using context.

The case for alt:

• Actually flux. It doesn't deviate from the flux architecture and uses flux's dispatcher.
• Isomorphic. Both creating instances or keeping stores as singletons.
• Terse, lessens the overhead (no constants, switch statements, no writing own dispatcher) but still has all the benefits of those (code grepability, able to listen to global dispatcher)
• Has some nice features (bootstrap / snapshots) which allow you to save the entire application state and then reload it later. This is great for debugging.

Well, there is also Flummox which aims to be idiomatic, modular, testable, isomorphic Flux & with no singletons required.

I came across this post and thought it was quite interesting, I have read the FLUX docs a while back and the possibilities are endless, however these flavours of flux just add a few tweaks to the Facebook flux minus a few of the core concept. (dispatching order, single point store optimisation, wait-for, and over all granular control)
Moreover the Facebook flux is more tested, more used and Facebook have demonstrated that it is very scalable.

The npm charts that are at the top of this page, is not drawn on the same scale, so comparing them visually will be misleading read the values carefully

@bartekus

ReferenceError: React is not defined

That's because any JSX expression (<Provider ...>...</Provider> in your case) is transformed to React.createElement() under the hood.

I've circled the addition

That's what you get after JSX:

ReactDOM.render(
  React.createElement(
    /*string/ReactClass type*/ Provider,
    /*[object props]*/ { store: store },
    /*[children ...]*/ {
      component: component,
      appContainer: appContainer,
      () => {
        // ...
      }
    }
  )
)

Is this what you expected to get?

Any ideas as to the best way to wrap whole application state with Provider as per Redux requirement?

https://github.com/erikras/react-redux-universal-hot-example/blob/master/src/client.js#L37

@sompylasar
Oh damn, I'm so thick, thank you for pointing the problem out and for the possible solution!
I guess in case of react-starter-kit direct, conversion to redux aint going to be as smooth as I was hoping it to be lol but erikras' example is the best yet so let's see if I can bend react-starter-kit to redux will...

On a side note I'm kinda surprised nobody has converted this kit to redux yet, considering it's part of WebStorm and it now being used in real, high-end development.

https://github.com/fluxury/fluxury

This is quite simple to use,

https://www.npmjs.com/package/fluxtore

https://github.com/ryanez/fluxtore

What flux? http://github.com/hellyeahllc/exim

😼

I personally use Alt, tried Redx and I didn't like switch statements, constants, too much boilerplate as for me.

@koistya could you please fix the typo by replacing depricated with deprecated ?

redux please :)

Switched to redux finally, it's easier when App grows I need to change and access data from different stores, it's easier when it's all single store.

Here we are using redux, the best of them all: github.com/Dindaleon/hapi-react-starter-kit

Does anyone have a fork of this kit with redux implemented?

@heks if not, you should be able to cobble one together using one or more of these: http://habd.as/awesome-react-boilerplates/

I'm going to close this one as it's not a real issue or feature request. But feel free to continue the conversation on this thread. You're also welcome to participate in discussions on Gitter, Appear.in, or StackOverflow.

Redux rocks :)

mobx? https://github.com/mobxjs/mobx

It's gaining mindshare. Haven't used it myself yet. I'd personally love to explore something a little less clever than Redux. The amount of boilerplate one has to write with Redux, middleware you have to use (i.e. thunk, saga, whathaveyou) can quickly lead to a mind numbing amount of analysis paralysis. That said just pick something and go with it, learn from your mistakes and get better next time. There is and will never be a "correct" answer to this infinite thread.

@jhabdas 100% agree. I'm really tired seeing so many new JS things these days. RxJS, NG2.0, ES7, JSPM, WebGL, fluxxxxxxxxZ etc, etc. Besides that, we have to be able to stay productive and GSD.

react's family!

react
& react-router-dom
& redux
& react-redux
& redux-thunk/redux-saga

Preact FTW! Wait, no. Inferno. Wait... ::thump::

Simpler redux alternative - dynamo.Js
http://www.medsquared.com.au/blog/simpler-redux-alternative-dynamojs/

Thanks for sharing @valera-rozuvan. I worked with Redux and React for 6 months at the Enterprise level and constantly felt myself wasting time trying to create simple interfaces. ⭐️ added

Apollo and Redux or Relay modern or everything else in this order.
Why?
Because of future.

But probably not this Apollo. Or this one.

@langpavel Do you mean Apollo from this project https://github.com/apollographql/react-apollo ?

I use this one.

https://www.npmjs.com/package/fluxury

@valera-rozuvan Yeah, this one: https://www.apollographql.com/docs/react/