Indeed, yet another failure to do a simple name search. Also see https://www.elf.com/en for a longstanding corporate use of that name, although I doubt there would be any confusion between the petroleum company and this project.
I note some humour there. My focus is purely in regards to a computer programming project being named identically to a longstanding, well known computer programming standard. Very sloppy of this group.
Imagine another possibility. The person that named their project Elf looked at the other projects named Elf and thought, "my project is more deserving of the name". Don't attribute to incompetence that which can be explained with vanity
I've been really itching for something that's like Redux, but works better with bundle splitting, has first-class support for entities and caching requests, and still has proper Typescript support. I'm going to be looking into this.
people have been thinking about that since we first used redux (which is what? 7 years) but it hasn't happened yet. Maybe, just maybe redux is a shit library, on top of which building something like that would be awkward, just look at RTK.
hey this is just a passer by rant and I did not intend to start a conversation about a topic I consider rather boring and visited countless times in the front-end community. At this point all arguments have been presented by someone at some point. I don't have anything new to say, and don't use redux anymore.
I don't know what the fact that you have "_a lot_" of happy users has anything to do here, may be that should make me happy? I should be.
This is the most "get off my lawn" thing I've read around here in a while. I'm baffled that the author thinks there's any mystery that many users and many designers like injecting some playfulness into their work. It's so over the top to describe the choice of playful logos as "manipulating [users], engendering stupidity as the desirable state they should be in". Realizing I don't want to be as much of a stick in the mud as the author is making me actively wonder how I can make my own work more playful.
Additionally I think the article makes a bit of a mistake to group up old distracting playfulness attempts (Microsoft Clippy and related assistants; I'd put other old fashions like animated cursor trails in this category too), playful logos (Google, Twitter, etc, like the Elf logo here), and flat design. Microsoft Clippy was egregious for surprising the user, animating about, and talking when the user is trying to focus. I think it's overreaching to look at Clippy, decide the playfulness was the bad part, and then associate its badness with logos and flat design. I think the article overlooks the intended benefits of flat design in how it simplifies the UI by removing unnecessary skeuomorphisms and details. (There are valid criticisms that flat design sometimes removes too many details and makes UIs harder to understand, but the article only talks about flat design as an arbitrary fashion of playfulness.)
Sorry but I view this kind of playfulness as an unnecessary distraction and regard it as unprofessional. Did you ever see a medical or engineering text (outside of software engineering) or mathematical text aimed at professionals with such graphics?
