Question 1

When should I use Ember Engines vs a traditional Ember app?

Accepted Answer

Use Ember Engines for large-scale applications that need modular, independent logical units, like micro-frontends within Ember. For smaller, cohesive apps, traditional Ember structure is simpler and more efficient, avoiding engine overhead.

Question 2

How do Ember Engines handle routing between engines?

Accepted Answer

Ember Engines support nested and isolated routing through Ember's router, allowing seamless navigation between engines. However, setup requires careful configuration to manage engine boundaries and avoid conflicts.

Question 3

What's the performance impact of using Ember Engines?

Accepted Answer

Engines can enable lazy loading and code splitting, improving initial load times for large apps. But they add runtime overhead for engine coordination and communication, so profile for specific use cases.

Question 4

Ember Engines vs other micro-frontend solutions like Single SPA?

Accepted Answer

Ember Engines is Ember-specific, offering deep integration with Ember's tooling and conventions, while Single SPA is framework-agnostic. Choose Engines for pure Ember projects; for mixed frameworks, Single SPA might be better.

Question 5

How to implement lazy loading with Ember Engines?

Accepted Answer

Configure engines to load asynchronously using Ember's lazy loading support. Define engines in your app's router with lazy loading flags, and ensure dependencies are managed to avoid bloat, as per the RFC implementation.

Question 6

Are there any common pitfalls when using Ember Engines?

Accepted Answer

Yes, common issues include state management across engines, routing conflicts, and build configuration complexities. Leverage Ember's services for communication and test thoroughly to avoid integration bugs.

ember-engines

What is ember-engines?

Overview

Use Cases

Best For

Found a gem we're missing?

Not Ideal For

Pros & Cons

Pros

Cons

Frequently Asked Questions