Post

tried writing this blog 3 times but it’s really boring, so here’s the short version: React won. Every mainstream f/w now implements its ideas, and developed their own ecosystems. The ones that didn’t, lost and died. This implies there’s no _strong_ reason to not pick one of the other winners.

but what about signals

React should have adopted signals before going nuts on a compiler or RSCs IMO. My 5 year prediction is a solid one… 😜

I still genuinely don't know what "React adopt signals" would _mean_ at a technical level. Per other comments in this thread, React works at the component level. What would a hypothetical native-to-React signals integration do differently?

It would have to have been something new. Breaking likely. Signals would allow: - finer grained updates than “component” e.g. jsx fragments - state/data flow that isn’t tied to component hierarchy and doesn’t need to rerender (or subscribe to a store to rerender) itself and its children

Wasn’t the whole premise of react that re-run all the time cause it’s generally fast. Wouldn’t this break that mental model? Honestly I like the way react works, almost all the other frameworks have the same signal based reactive model. We need competing models.

It was fast compared to existing models back 8 years ago. But now it’s easy to get into trouble quickly. Fine grained reactivity is the next step, just like functional memoization was from digest cycles and dirty checking.

Fair point. Old ideas, new paint. I think the latest stuff I'm seeing come out of Solid 2.0's new signals implementation is pretty far beyond impressive compared to any reactivity paradigms I've seen in a long while.

Where's a good writeup on the new implementation?

@ryansolid.bsky.social @devagr.bsky.social