Two-way data binding is just a shorthand for the double one-way data binding you do in React.
From view-model to view: either dirty-check, proxy or wrap the property in a getter/setter.
From view to view-model: listen for specific DOM events (most notably, change)
In React you need to manage the synchronization yourself. A framework can do this properly for you (I'll name Aurelia since that's what I use and work on) without sacrificing on control or flexibility.
A framework supporting two-way binding out of the box will typically have a more robust mechanism than the variant you'll write by hand, which everyone might do a little differently.
I would therefore say that two-way data binding does indeed minimize the risk of errors, granted it is done well. It also reduces boilerplate (resulting in a smaller and easier to maintain app) and tends to improve performance (Aurelia outperforms React by over a factor of 3 in binding/observation, although that has more to do with the use of observers instead of a VDOM)
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Two-way data binding is just a shorthand for the double one-way data binding you do in React.
change)In React you need to manage the synchronization yourself. A framework can do this properly for you (I'll name Aurelia since that's what I use and work on) without sacrificing on control or flexibility.
A framework supporting two-way binding out of the box will typically have a more robust mechanism than the variant you'll write by hand, which everyone might do a little differently.
I would therefore say that two-way data binding does indeed minimize the risk of errors, granted it is done well. It also reduces boilerplate (resulting in a smaller and easier to maintain app) and tends to improve performance (Aurelia outperforms React by over a factor of 3 in binding/observation, although that has more to do with the use of observers instead of a VDOM)