Holy hyperbole, Batman! That article took a long time to get to the point, and I'm a touch hesitant to use the same breathless tone as the author. As I understand it, the model is the same as Elm. Separating specifying the computation (in this case, defining the event processing graph) from running the computation is an old trick in FP circles[1]. It's great to see JS libraries moving forward, but it would sure be an easier read if the author dropped the embellishment.<p>[1] Blog post about this: <a href="http://underscore.io/blog/posts/2015/04/28/monadic-io-laziness-makes-you-free.html" rel="nofollow">http://underscore.io/blog/posts/2015/04/28/monadic-io-lazine...</a>
Cycle.js <a href="http://cycle.js.org/" rel="nofollow">http://cycle.js.org/</a> says that it allows "thisless JavaScript: The use of functions and RxJS Observables allow for a JavaScript programming style without the this keyword. Cycle.js encourages you to create apps with functional practices. Without this, you can write more reusable code and define logic without tightly coupling it to data. See it for yourself, this cannot be found in Cycle.js TodoMVC."<p>this, uh, doesn't seem to match my normal understanding of JS. Normally the method to reuse code is to change what 'this' refers to, but the statement above implies the existence of 'this' is a failure of JavaScript's design. I would like some elaboration.
I've been playing with Cycle.js and was struggling a little even though I have previous experience in RxJS but after going through this article it really cleared up some fundamental aspects to Cycle.js :)
> This embedded content is from a site that does not comply with the Do Not Track (DNT) setting now enabled on your browser.<p>Never seen that before; +1 for medium.com