moostee10 hours ago
Proposed variant optimised for human readaiblity...
```js import mador from "mador"; const [read, write] = mador({ count: 1 }); read(".counter", ctx => ctx.el.textContent = ctx.count); write(".increment", "click", ctx => ctx.count++); write(ctx => ctx.count = 0); ```
## Read
Dependencies are detected automatically when the read function is run during initiation.
```js read(".counter", ctx => ctx.el.textContent = `Count: ${ctx.count}`); ```
## Write
Immediate:
```js write(ctx => ctx.count++); ```
Event-triggered:
```js write(".increment", "click", ctx => ctx.count++); ```
Event writes expose `ctx.el` and `ctx.event`.
bosmarcelop10 hours ago
O yes, thanks, appreciate it! I'm tired now, but i will find the time tomorrow to make it more readable!
codedokode8 hours ago
The syntax looks a bit too verbose for me. And function names like "read" and "write" are confusing too, given that "read" function isn't made for reading values. Cannot we use a single function for binding, like this (and name it "bind")?
let counter = proxy({ count: 0 });
bind('.counter', (el) => el.textContent = counter.count);
counter.count++; // Queues DOM update
> Mador is distributed as an ES module.
This means it cannot be used on a page opened from disk, and the user needs to set up a HTTP server which is time-consuming and distracting. And you cannot distribute an app as as HTML file.
pwdisswordfishqan hour ago
https://github.com/tc39/proposal-module-expressions will fix the latter.
bedroom_jabroni10 hours ago
There are many standalone plug-n-play implementations of the signal primitive in JS. To name a few: preact/signals, vue reactivity, etc, there's even a TC39 proposal for a lang feature. Is this meant to stand out by doing things differently or reinvent them?
nxobject7 hours ago
(Just for (my) reference, the TC39 proposal is here:
bosmarcelop10 hours ago
Honestly, mostly for the fun of building it and seeing how small and simple I could make it. While big solutions like Preact or Vue are great, sometimes you just want a tiny zero-dependency script without the overhead. And it turned out to be quite nice as I may say so
bedroom_jabroni9 hours ago
preact/signals-core has 0 dependencies, your project could also benefit from mentioning what primitive is being implemented for the reader's information. The size difference is negligible. The readme creates a false dilemma where there's either Mador or "having to use a framework" but it hasn't been the case for ages - as I mentioned above the major frameworks have decoupled versions of their reactivity available. This makes the other reply where "the frontend community deserves tools like this" sound weird because it ignores the great tools that have been available for a while.
Good learning experience but a very weird presentation.
kevinfiolan hour ago
It's not that weird of a presentation, just different ergonomics for the same problem.
preact/signals-core is great, but since HTML elements have no way to subscribe to signals, you have to handle that yourself:
import { signal, effect } from "@preact/signals-core";
const $ = (s) => document.querySelector(s);
const counter = signal(0);
effect(() => {
$('.counter').textContent = counter.value;
});
$('.increment').addEventListener('click', () => {
counter.value += 1;
});
vs mador:
import mador from "https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/@marsbos/mador@latest/dist/mador.js";
const $ = (s) => document.querySelector(s);
const [read, write] = mador({
count: 0,
});
read(".counter", (el, count) => {
el.textContent = count;
},
(state) => state.count,
);
$('.increment').addEventListener('click', () => {
write((state) => { state.count++; });
});
bosmarcelopan hour ago
Great post/reply, thanks a lot
bosmarcelop9 hours ago
That's a fair distinction, but I think they solve different problems. Signals are great, but they usually require managing primitives individually and don't map directly to deep, nested JS objects the same way. Mador is specifically about dropping in a plain, nested object and working with it like normal JS without .value "boilerplate". Appreciate the feedback on the README phrasing though—I'll tweak it so it doesn't sound like a false dilemma!
afavour9 hours ago
First time I’ve seen Preact described as a “big solution”!
afavour8 hours ago
I’m curious to know what performance looks like. In the recesses of my memory is the belief that proxies are not good for performance but I have no idea if that’s well founded (or maybe once was but isn’t any more).
It’s a very smart idea though, I like it.
codedokode8 hours ago
It depends on count of variables and dependencies. The much worse problem with proxies is that they can be confused with raw values, for example, you can add a proxy into a Set, and then check for existence of a raw value. Or confuse raw value and proxy in dictionary's keys.
abosalehworld8 hours ago
I love the minimalist approach here. Using Proxies for state management without the heavy overhead of large frameworks is really elegant. Keeping it under 80 lines is impressive. Great work!
PoignardAzur10 hours ago
Are reactive updates based on deep equality or reference equality?
bosmarcelop10 hours ago
It is based on ref. equality, so assignment through '=' will trigger an "effect".
DylanMerigaud11 hours ago
Clean launch, good luck!
bosmarcelop11 hours ago
Thanx a lot!
ahmedhossamdev10 hours ago
Great work!
bosmarcelop10 hours ago
Thanks, I really appreciate it! Hope others will feel the same. The frontend community needs and deserves simple tools:)
antonvs10 hours ago
This makes me think of a version of that comic where in the last pane, you get thrown out the window for suggesting such a sensible thing.
bosmarcelop9 hours ago
Hahaha! Exactly
bosmarcelop11 hours ago
Hey HN! I wanted to see how far you can push modern JavaScript Proxies without all the heavy overhead of a traditional framework. The result is Mador: a tiny ~80-line reactive state tuple ([r, w]) that lets you make any DOM element reactive using a simple CSS selector, automated dependency tracking, and batched microtasks. No build steps required—just drop it in. I built this over the weekend just to experiment with clean, zero-dependency reactivity. Would love to hear your thoughts or see where you'd run into limits with something like this!
hamburglar10 hours ago
> Hey HN! I wanted to see how far you can push modern JavaScript Proxies without all the heavy overhead of a traditional framework. The result is Mador: a tiny ~80-line reactive state tuple ([r, w]) that lets you make any DOM element reactive using a simple CSS selector, automated dependency tracking, and batched microtasks. No build steps required—just drop it in. I built this over the weekend just to experiment with clean, zero-dependency reactivity. Would love to hear your thoughts or see where you'd run into limits with something like this!
Unsure why this comment from the author was flagged/dead but it certainly doesn’t seem to run afoul of HN guidelines.
dpweb10 hours ago
The core idiom I've used for years is deliberately tiny: fully encapsulated custom Web Components that simply re-render when matching an attribute and `window.state` changes. Data model is simply:
window.state = new Proxy({}, {
set(target, key, value) {
target[key] = value
document.querySelectorAll(`[data="${key}"]`)
.forEach(el => el.render?.())
return true
}
})