7 ms·
> the use of decorators in even the most basic example Can we agree that JSX is not a valid JS? So decorators are required indeed to simulate "JSX magic" > n
by greyblake 5y ago
> the use of decorators in even the most basic example
Can we agree that JSX is not a valid JS? So decorators are required indeed to simulate "JSX magic"
> no async/await.
As I mentioned, it's not an really an issue (although I though it will be). At least from my experience.
> You can't have two files with the same name in different folders??
This sucks indeed :)
The problem that those 20% corrupt the value of another 80% :/
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- MoSattler 5y ago> Can we agree that JSX is not a valid JS? Neither is rescript - so why not make jsx a first class citizen?
- yawaramin 5y agoJSX is a first-class citizen in ReScript. No decorators required for JSX. Only required for React component function signature.
- greyblake 5y agoBecause a programming language is not a template engine.
- scrollaway 5y agoNeither is jsx. It’s just syntactic sugar for some recursive function calls.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]