Hi Brian,
When looking at the Readme of Mount (I think) I already see global state
backed in.
(defstate ^{:on-reload :noop}
mem-db :start (connect config)
:stop (disconnect mem-db))
Do I misunderstand this or do we just disagree on what global state is?
What if I want to have several (different) `mem-db` instances, how would
that work?
On Fri, Apr 8, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Brian Platz <brian.platz@place.works> wrote:
>
> >> This is also something that wouldn't be possible with Mount as this
> library seems to promote global state.
>
> As a recent switcher from Component to Mount, and without trying to change
> the thread's topic into a this vs. that -- I'll simply say that I don't
> believe any of these tools promote global state, it is people who code
> global state, and that can be with any of these tools... or likewise
> avoided with any of these tools.
>
> Some tools (i.e. Component) probably make it more difficult to have global
> state, but I think it is heavy handed. For projects with a lot of
> components, I would spend a lot of time backtracking components all feeding
> into each other to figure out where some var was when working in REPL. I'd
> also repeatedly deal with errors when adding new components as I didn't set
> up the dependencies correctly at first... just several interlocking pieces
> that all need to be coordinated, and I sometimes forget one (or two).
>
> Mount probably makes it a little easier to have global state, but that is
> up to the developer - I have no more global state than I had before the
> switch. I find it easier to work in REPL and get access to a var, or conn,
> etc. when I need to eval something, and I think all these components are
> primarily there to make the REPL workflow better. Also, I'm out of the
> business of managing my dependencies, which my challenges might just root
> from an absent-mindedness that I possess. Once it is in production, the
> component stuff matters very little anyhow.
>
> All to say that these tools, assuming they provide the feature needs that
> have been outlined well in this thread, should not make anything 'not
> possible' and can have as much or as little global state as the developer
> chooses to code in. I cringe a bit when I repeatedly see that Mount
> promotes global state, I think that is a falsehood.
>
> -Brian
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Clojure" group.
> To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with
> your first post.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Clojure" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Clojure" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
