Ask HN: Server side rendering is now a good idea?

#1

Post by mrvenkman » Fri, Jan 06, 2023, 8:41 PM UTC

Thanks to the speed of the internet, I’m beginning to feel that logic on server side with PHP or other server side technology, is just as interactive as JavaScript - without the complexity of React, Angular [insert framework here] and associated package and state management.

Oh, and security!

Thoughts?

Re: Ask HN: Server side rendering is now a good idea?

#2

Post by andrewfromx » Fri, Jan 06, 2023, 8:47 PM UTC

checkout how rails does best of both worlds with something called "turbo" https://www.hotrails.dev/turbo-rails/crud-controller-ruby-on...

Re: Ask HN: Server side rendering is now a good idea?

#3

Post by v3ss0n » Fri, Jan 06, 2023, 9:23 PM UTC

Even in J's world they are back to server side rendering, check astro

Re: Ask HN: Server side rendering is now a good idea?

#4

Post by caprock » Fri, Jan 06, 2023, 9:27 PM UTC

You might want to look into what the creator of htmx has to say about this topic. He's here on hn and may even show up for this thread.

Here are the essays:

* https://htmx.org/essays/

Re: Ask HN: Server side rendering is now a good idea?

#5

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jan 06, 2023, 9:29 PM UTC

[deleted]

Re: Ask HN: Server side rendering is now a good idea?

#6

Post by speedgoose » Fri, Jan 06, 2023, 9:40 PM UTC

Always has been.

I think that you do need interactivity through JavaScript at some point. And I find react and similar easier to maintain than an HTML/JS soup generated by PHP, JSP, or RoR.

I would take a look at https://fresh.deno.dev/ or https://kit.svelte.dev/ or https://nextjs.org/

Re: Ask HN: Server side rendering is now a good idea?

#7

Post by pbedat » Fri, Jan 06, 2023, 9:42 PM UTC

andrewfromx wrote: post #2

checkout how rails does best of both worlds with something called "turbo" https://www.hotrails.dev/turbo-rails/crud-controller-ruby-on...

Turbo is just a JS library, not tied to rails. I use it with golang and I love it! It offers a nice tradeoff between heavy custom HTML attributes and too much 'convention over configuration'. Also pairs nicely with alpine.js

Re: Ask HN: Server side rendering is now a good idea?

#8

Post by sergiotapia » Fri, Jan 06, 2023, 10:16 PM UTC

It's a lot simpler for sure these days. I've built my indie startup with Phoenix Liveview. It's all server side rendered, with liveview sprinkling in interactivity.

Can you tell it's server side rendered? https://www.gamedrop.gg/lists/slymilano/exciting-game-releas...

https://www.gamedrop.gg/game/hogwarts-legacy

I think there are similar tools in other platforms like Rail's and Laravel.

Re: Ask HN: Server side rendering is now a good idea?

#9

Post by eyelidlessness » Fri, Jan 06, 2023, 10:29 PM UTC

speedgoose wrote: post #6

Always has been. I think that you do need interactivity through JavaScript at some point. And I find react and similar easier to maintain than an HTML/JS soup generated by PHP, JSP, or RoR. I would take a look at https://fresh.deno.dev/ or https://kit.svelte.dev/ or https://nextjs.org/

Others worth a look:

- Qwik[1]: code is very similar to React, only the interactive parts are sent to the browser, and they only execute on demand (eg when you interact with the thing)

- Astro[2]: probably the most popular “islands” framework, lets you bring your own interactive framework

- SolidStart[3]: doesn’t mention in the docs yet for some reason, but also supports “islands” in SolidJS, which is also one of the fastest client frameworks and also will feel familiar coming from React

[1]: https://qwik.builder.io/

[2]: https://astro.build/

[3]: https://start.solidjs.com/getting-started/what-is-solidstart

Re: Ask HN: Server side rendering is now a good idea?

#10

Post by comrad » Fri, Jan 06, 2023, 10:36 PM UTC

Oh, are we now full circle back to good old server side programming again. Just like in the 90s? I mean it's not bad - but it's definetly not new...