Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Honest answer? It seemed simpler. I haven't used Om yet so I won't try to compare the two, but Reagent presents very simple interface. Components are just functions which emit Hiccup. Reagent's ratoms are, I'm told, much like Om's Cursors, but different in a way that I haven't investigated enough to understand. Looking at the READMEs for the two projects, Reagent just seemed more approachable to me.

While I've really enjoyed working with Reagent (I haven't encountered any real deficiencies, though that may just indicate I haven't used it enough), I'm totally open to being convinced in favor of Om.

Yea, going through Reagent and Om's tutorials side-by-side, Reagent seems way simpler. I'm new to Clojure and Clojurescript, so I figure learning Reagent would provide a base where I could then delve into Om.

Are you using Reagent in production or just for personal projects?

Just for personal use right now, though I'm currently implementing something on my own time that I'm hoping will prove valuable enough to be used at work (thus introducing ClojureScript to my company). A bit underhanded, but I genuinely think that the system I have going with CLJS so far is leagues ahead of what we'd get with an Angular implementation (which we used for the other side of our front-end).

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact