Thanks for the feedback! I’ll be sure to add these soon. 
Well, that was quite rude… @jasperagent_dev I think this is nice since otherwise, it’d need to look like something like this.
local Part = Instance.new("Part")
Part.Name = "My new part!"
Part.Parent = workspace
Part.Positon = Vector3.new(0, 8, 0)
Which is fine but being able to instance the part and change its properties all in one is honestly a lot nicer.
Thanks for the positive reply, another thing is that making the instances is a bit easier/faster for some people, which is one of my main purposes. Also, if I came off as rude- sorry! 
That sometimes happens when I’m typing, because I begin to get too factual about my work when I type about it, leading to misconcetions in my meaning
2 Likes
This is awesome! I’m sure this will be very useful to many up and coming developers.
1 Like
fusion is a great library, and its in development by a couple of people, against 32 collaborators in roact’s system.
it may be not that great (for you) but it’s a quality library.
Great resource by the way
1 Like
This looks incredibly useful! I do have one question though? Here it says that you can’t add more than one child to an object:
But then here is says you can:
So I was just wondering if you can add a child to a child or not? I may be misunderstanding this though so I apologize if that is the case
But either way this looks incredibly useful and I will most likely be using this in the future! Thanks!
1 Like
fusion can be used to create any instance, not just UI
Ah! So a created instance can have multiple children, however having more children inside of those children are not possible currently.
1 Like
My point with it was that it’s mainly based upon UI, however this is focused on all types of instances instead of just UI. This means Fusion or Roact are going to contain more UI-Based functions or features. My resource is trying to respond to all of this.
I can help u with that if you want. its rlly ez
1 Like
I looked at your complains on your repl free tier website and your arguments seem to consist of
- Roact has more stars on github
- Fusion is in alpha
- You have to make your own components
Honestly those first 2 literally do not matter at all unless you need a high amount of support.
And the 3rd one? The whole point in using a library like fusion is to create your own components and have them easily interface well with your scripts, if you really want to have components made by other people you can just use a module made by another person which uses fusion.
The only thing that you mentioned that I agree with is that I wish fusion would use a state management system separate from fusion itself but its not a major concern for me.
2 Likes
continue in dms its getting so offtopic
anyway, what you said is too bogus. First of all, I like how you said “free tier repl website” to make me feel worse. If anything, I would rather a worse server than read this at all.
Second,
I know you said “consist of” but your saying its like the only reasons i put it in my website, mind debunking the other reasons or are you scared to get wrecked?
Then its really awful. The point of 3rd party modules, is to use the functions in it so you dont have to write it yourself. In this special case, you have to? The only thing fusion has wrote so far is state, element, animations, and thats so far i know at a 20 minute look into fusion.
Roact? you have all these, but you dont have to make these yourself. sure, some things like animations are in other modules like roact-spring, but its better than having to make these functions yourself.
Thats it.
In the module’s current form it’s gotten the functions for it, however the functions fail to work. I’m still investigation it now, but I’ll let you know if I’m ever in need of help
1 Like
This is awful.
This module does not shorten the “outcome of code”, “clean up your code” or increase productivity. Does it also cook my code too? In fact, I cannot come up with one use case for this.
Definitely.
I don’t get the hype of UI libraries incorporated to game engines that already make this task easier for you by providing visual assistance. It’s bad practice and highly redundant.
Is this like the old RbxUtility.Create, except you have to directly put “Properties” which is a little annoying. Or is it intended to be more like Roact?
-- RbxUtility.Create
create "Model" {
Name = "Test"
create "Part" {
Position = Vector3.zero,
Anchored = true,
}
Parent = workspace,
}
It really does seem like that library. Why should we choose this over the RbxUtility.Create module?
1 Like
Hiya! Thanks for the feedback(?)
I get that everyone has their own views of certain things, and thats fine :). I get that you might not like this resource:
But for me it helps, and I just took into concideration some people might think it helps too;
Whether it helps you or not, it does not cook your code- so please, don’t eat it.
(Also to @SubtotalAnt8185)
There is a reason for the manual Properties section, however I am working on it as of when I’m writing this, and I have taken that into account and I’ve figured out a way to remove it. As for RbxUtility.Create- I did say
So please, if you do find it helpful, do you use whatever one you prefer :).
1 Like
How come this is faster than Instance.new?
The ability to add children and properties immediately instead of having to rely on multiple lines at once. This may be slower for some people who’ve adapted to constant
local a = Instance.new("Part")
-- begins to repeat a lot
a.Color = Color3.fromRGB(255, 255, 255)
a.Name = "super cool part"
a.Anchored = true
a.CanCollide = false
a.Position = Vector3.new(0, 8, 0)
a.Parent = workspace
-- then you have to do this again with children
local b = Instance.new("BillboardGui")
...
But for me and some others it’s faster for it to just be there. This (in my opinion) is also helpful with DockWidgetPlugins when developing the UI.