You probably don't need a JavaScript framework

Post by timr » Sat, Apr 30, 2016, 1:12 AM UTC

dang wrote: post #24

timr wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"That the author kind of misses this point makes me pay less attention to the rest of the post." Too bad. The author addressed everything you said. You just didn't read past the sentence you quoted. Nowhere does the piece imply that you should render every state change server-side. In fact, it goes on to show, with specific examples, of how you can get data-binding and partial-update behavior with web-native APIs. Th…

I think I agree with you, but your comment breaks the HN guidelines twice: the first paragraph is uncivil and the final one goes on about getting downvoted. It also pretty much breaks the injunction against "did you even read the article" comments, so that's three. Please don't do these things when commenting here, regardless of how irritatingly wrong someone else may be. The middle paragraph is helpful and fine, and…

Post by dang » Sat, Apr 30, 2016, 1:14 AM UTC

timr wrote: post #32

dang wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I agree with you, but your comment breaks the HN guidelines twice: the first paragraph is uncivil and the final one goes on about getting downvoted. It also pretty much breaks the injunction against "did you even read the article" comments, so that's three. Please don't do these things when commenting here, regardless of how irritatingly wrong someone else may be. The middle paragraph is helpful and fine, and…

The first paragraph wasn't uncivil. He said that he didn't read past the first few sentences of the article: "That the author kind of misses this point makes me pay less attention to the rest of the post." If they had read the rest of the post, they would have seen that their argument was addressed. You're being unfair here. The top-rated comment is from someone mischaracterizing the piece, saying he didn't read it..…

Post by TheCoelacanth » Sat, Apr 30, 2016, 1:16 AM UTC

tomc1985 wrote: post #28

Touche wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In reality JavaScript size means very little when a single image might be 500k.

Did you not see that headline about how the average page now is the size of a Doom install?

Post by kevinqi » Sat, Apr 30, 2016, 1:17 AM UTC

_asummers wrote: post #17

statictype wrote: post #6

React doesn't exist to handle the massive amounts of data that facebook has. React exists to make complex UIs easier to build and maintain. Being able to just write the code once to render a UI from some state and then just reloading the entire UI when the state changes is an incredible simplification of your code. That the author kind of misses this point makes me pay less attention to the rest of the post.

Moreover, I don't even consider React a framework. I consider it a library for my creating my view layer. Frameworks, at least to me coming from back end, have all sorts of extra bells and whistles. Something like Angular I would consider a framework and it has its OWN view layer inside. But React feels much different, it feels like something your (non-view layer) framework should feed into, not replace entirely.

Post by 8note » Sat, Apr 30, 2016, 1:18 AM UTC

fizixer wrote: post #31

tomc1985 wrote: post #27

This! This times a million times!!~! Seriously. The javascript world is INSANE. All these frameworks and few truly need them... node.js package management is a mess... yet how many of these coders will take the time to learn real ES5? It really isn't that hard of a language. I feel like calling oneself a "javascript" expert practically requires knowledge of a framework or too. This is saddening, because Javascript it…

As a javascript-noob, not even jquery? I've heard jquery solved so many headaches.