Performance-Analysis-JS VS Cycle.js

Using a for loop will be more efficient because the construct doesn’t invoke a callback. Here’s one example but most jsperf searches will say the same thing.

https://github.com/dg92/Performance-Analysis-JS

The problem with JS is that the execution model is so nebulous, that performance advice basically boils down to - trust in Google.

Seems like you might be interested in this

Cycle

This is the standard way of going about things in Mithril and Cycle. Elm as well doesn't use an XML knockoff for view code- and as a fun fact, the original version of React didn't either.

For example, an FRP framework (created by the same author who later wrote the callbag spec): https://cycle.js.org/

TypeScript is relatively mainstream at this point, and I think that's good news. If you want to crank the type-safety and pure FP dials on it to 11, you certainly can do that. I have a project that I've based largely on this post, including the "hardcore" section. However, instead of Redux and otherwise plain React, I've chosen to use Cycle.js and the lessons from this post to use React in a very purely Functional Reactive Programming Way.

This post links to a PureScript project that is probably the easiest PS framework around.

ReScript + rescript-react is a good alternative. Less safe, waaaay more verbose; but backed by Facebook.

This is quite cute (in TypeScript though): https://github.com/cyclejs/cyclejs

And Yew is super cool, it goes the WASM route (in Rust): https://github.com/yewstack/yew

From now on I was on what I would call a typical open source trajectory. I used the Cycle.js framework to rewrite my frontend and in that process I hit some walls. I eventually figured that the error was on my side and that I was just missing some information to avoid the error. To spare others the hours of debugging I started to contribute small patches to the documentation. At the same time I also found some missing features that I voiced in GitHub issues.