I&#x27;m curious what peoples reaction would be to a framework&#x2F;library that borrowed from Smalltalk&#x27;s principles.<p>With the current lineup of frameworks, there&#x27;s a lot of effort made to remove state from the system in order to make it understandable and performant (which is reminiscent of how people talked about Haskel a few years ago).<p>Yet with Smalltalk the entire language and tool base embraced the existence of state and gave you a lot of tooling to help make it manageable.<p>To me, the main problem with frameworks such as Backbone&#x2F;Angular 1 is that state was bidirectional and that anyone could attach event listeners on anything so your webpage was a network of state flow with none of that being transactional, nor guaranteeing that the system would come into a consistent&#x2F;valid state.<p>React is great with their unidirectional approach for rendering, but when a deeply embedded component makes a state change for itself it may logically have to effect the entire system. The current practice is to have top-down handling with Dispatchers&#x2F;Stores (Flux), or pure reducers (Redux).<p>Another approach would be to compartmentalize each component so actions can automatically bubble upwards where they are handled by whomever in the VirtualDOM tree can take up the task. This would do away with global dispatch, and make it easier to mix and match components. I think this approach has merit.