▲ | kobieps 4 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
Agreed @ not for the faint of heart. There is at least one alternative "CRDT-free" approach for the less brave among us: https://mattweidner.com/2025/05/21/text-without-crdts.html | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | quotemstr 4 days ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
> Difference from CRDTs The author has made a CRDT. He denies that his algorithm constitutes a CRDT. It's a straightforward merge, not a "fancy algorithm". What specific aspect of a CRDT does this solution not satisfy? The C? The R? The D? The T? | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
▲ | josephg 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Matt Weindner is a really smart guy, but I really disagree with his reasoning with that one. I implemented his fuguemax crdt in just 250 lines of code or so. It’s small, simple and fast. In that blog post he proposes a different approach that might let you save 50 lines of code at the expense of always needing a centralised server. Seems like a terrible trade to me. Just use a crdt. They’re good. |