Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
48 lines (34 loc) · 2.2 KB

ViewsOnGlobalRegistration.md

File metadata and controls

48 lines (34 loc) · 2.2 KB

Question

I feel offended by re-frame's reg-* API. How is it functional to side effect globally?

Background

A re-frame app is defined collectively by its handlers. As an app boots, calls to registration functions like reg-event-db and reg-sub collectively "build up" an app, infusing it with behaviour and capability.

Currently, this "building up" process involves progressive mutation of a global registrar (map) held internally within re-frame. Each registration adds a new entry to this registrar.

How should we analyse this from a functional point of view?

Answer

There's three ways to view this:

  1. Egads! Say it isn't true. Mutation of a global? Summon the functional lynch mob!

  2. We all understand the potential dangers of mutation, particularly of globals but re-frame's design represents a conscious decision to trade off some functional theory for simplicity of developer experience. So, yes, it represents a point in the possible design space with associated pros and cons. But the cons are theoretical and the pros are real.

  3. There's no purity problem. As a Clojure program starts, each defn (becomes a def which) happily interns a symbol and function in a map-ish structure representing a namespace. The lynch mob stays home for that. The pitchforks remain in their rack. re-frame handler registration is the same pattern - an id and handler function are interned within a map-ish structure (a registrar), once, on program load. If you hate on what re-frame does, you should also hate on defn. I claim your discomfort only arises because you don't understand how you are creating a virtual machine when you program re-frame

Up: FAQ Index