The method of explaining things is cute, but - for me at least - completely opaque. These are concepts I already understand, and this "simplification" of them into analogy-land seems to obscure them beyond recognition in my mind.

Maybe someone of a different bent will find this more accessible?

Similar to you. I can almost never follow the analogy all the way through when I read articles like this. I'm usually lost by the second or third corollary drawn from it. I had thought this was just because I'm stupid until I read your comment.

I see... Basically, I have to get this message across: "The reason why RN (javascript side) uses unique objects -- frozen, even -- is because they need to have their STRICT equivalent on the 'other side' (java or xcode)".

That being said, I felt like I had 3 possibilities: (A) leave it like this, although this (to me) feels like a "shut up and believe me, this is how it works", (B) explain it in plain programming terms (a.k.a. review the code itself), but since this is not the main theme of the article -- and i'm not writing a book -- this needs to be quick, (C) trying to get the "feeling" across with an analogy, giving up on any pure code explanation

So basically a) no explanation at all b) explanation but might be too quick/bad/hard to understand or c) no explanation but a "graphic" idea of how things happens. I picked c), but what would people disagreeing have picked? (also, if there are options I did not think about, by all means point them out!).

I am genuinely interested, in case I write another similar article later on. Perhaps what I'm missing is that all those interested in my article actually already have this "feeling of how things work" and are looking for a long, thorough explanation about it?

(I've always loved analogies -- perhaps there are less people feeling the same way than I first thought...)

Disclaimer: I know this is subjective, so what I say below may absolutely not apply to others. Just how I see it.

> b) explanation but might be too quick/bad/hard to understand

I think this assumption may be underestimating your reader

> Perhaps what I'm missing is that all those interested in my article actually already have this "feeling of how things work" and are looking for a long, thorough explanation about it?

This is possible, I guess, but my intuition tells me I'd feel the same is I were coming from "I know JS & React Native basics but haven't explored Native APIs and the bridge in detail yet". But I could be wrong.

> I've always loved analogies

I use analogies a lot, and find them incredibly valuable for explaining complex concepts from one domain, to someone unfamiliar with that domain, in an reduced and simplified way.

What you're doing here is trying to explain a new concept (a) in the domain the reader is already familiar with and (b) to expand, not reduce, the detail understanding of said concept.

(a) seems to make analogies unnecessary but (b) also seems to make analogies unsuitable (requiring you to draw second or third corrallories from them - as the gp said, bringing the reader further and further from the original concept).

> I think this assumption may be underestimating your reader

You probably nailed it right there. Although I swear this was not intentional, reading your comment and re-reading my article myself made me realize this might be the unfortunate effect of me not knowing exactly what audience would be interested by my article.

As my first article on the topic of events, which was pure "theory" (meaning no code at all), got me questions on "how to use it though?", I wanted to write something with actual usable examples. Reading your opinion however, I might have messed up and, trying to be "more practical" ended up being "(too) simple"...

In any case, I will try to get more opinions -- thanks a lot for yours! Accurate and not insulting by any means, I'd love it if I could more of these -- and perhaps rewrite the analogy part into something more "meaty".

Pity there aren't too many commenters here; like stefantheard, I'm actually quite curious if it's just me(/us) and if there are plenty of people out there who'd really grok this.