Context: I am developing an amateur web application (with Vue.js), made up of components, and when reading about state management, the recommended solution is to use a store that gets updated by the components.

Over the last 30 years, I have been reading how using global variables is bad design, and I understand that, having slowly appreciated the functional aspects of building a function that is not dependent on the external world, and that gets what it needs as parameters (broadly speaking).

How is the store (or bus) approach different? How does this not breaks maintenance and reuse of components?

It is certainly easier to have one shared store and not worry about passing data in, and handling emitted messages out of components but, again, I have concerns about long-term maintenance.

  • This might be of interest to you https://stackoverflow.com/questions/33424157/isnt-redux-just-glorified-global-state
    – Becuzz
    Commented Nov 16, 2021 at 12:46
  • I am also curious about the downvotes: is the question too obvious (sorry, I am not a professional developer), or too obvious? If this is a topic that has a definite answer I would be interested to know as well.
    – WoJ
    Commented Nov 16, 2021 at 13:13
  • @WoJ, if you ever work out why people downvote good questions like this, then you are doing better than me. I've been trying to understand it for years and I'm nowhere nearer to knowing the answer. I think this an excellent question and I'm looking forward to seeing an answer from someone who knows about this.
    – David Arno
    Commented Nov 16, 2021 at 14:11
  • I guess because the answer is "it isn't, java-script is crap"^H^H^H^H i mean because the question invites criticism of vue (and similar frameworks. Although I understand vue allows you to pass models down the tree and avoid global state?
    – Ewan
    Commented Nov 16, 2021 at 15:35
  • @Ewan: yes, Vue allows that (that was my point in the last paragraph of the question), but also recommends to move to a global state rather than doing this (at least at some scale)
    – WoJ
    Commented Nov 16, 2021 at 15:44

1 Answer 1


So javascript SPA frameworks have a couple of problems for which global state is an easy solution.

  1. They are not directly in control of the objects rendered by the browser. They have to go through HTML encoding first and then the browser has to render the HTML.

  2. The goal of these frameworks is to make things simple and webpages don't tend to need a lot of logic.

Considering point 1. Pages consist of components and components can have sub components. The alternative to global state requires events that get passed back "up the tree" from sub components to the page and then back down again to other sub components.

If you are rending a window in directx at 60fps and each component reads its values from memory this is pretty simple. Hook up your events and you are go. If you have to calculate all the changes, render virtual HTML, check of differences with the last frame, alter the HTML, write the altered HTML to the DOM, wait for the browser to render the new HTML you may have performance issues.

Also its hard to write the framework. If you have global state you can change it and redraw once from the top down.

Considering point 2, global state is easy to understand and program. I don't need events or call backs or mediators, I have one, one way, draw loop. Do I need more for 90% of webpages?

But yes, I agree its not good practice and for complex web applications it makes things awkward and highly coupled. However. Another rule of programming is don't try and fight the framework. Maybe vue is not suitable for complex interfaces and you should go with a canvas and pure js, or web asm

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.