Blazing Fast HTML: Elm vs. React vs. Angular vs. Ember
1–10 of 55 posts
Re: Blazing Fast HTML: Elm vs. React vs. Angular vs. Ember
#2Wow - I'm a big fan of React, so I'm a little disappointed to see that it was the slowest of all.
Re: Blazing Fast HTML: Elm vs. React vs. Angular vs. Ember
#3As much as I trust benchmarks from the creator of a product at the end of the day they are all fast frameworks.
Re: Blazing Fast HTML: Elm vs. React vs. Angular vs. Ember
#4Speed is one thing, but the fact that you must replicate your business model client AND server-side with Elm is a huge minus. I would take ScalaJS over any 4 of those frameworks any day.
Re: Blazing Fast HTML: Elm vs. React vs. Angular vs. Ember
#5Wow - I'm a big fan of React, so I'm a little disappointed to see that it was the slowest of all.
I am not a big fan of react but making generalisations about performance based on benchmarking todoMVC is well not very convincing.
Re: Blazing Fast HTML: Elm vs. React vs. Angular vs. Ember
#6Whats the difference between a few seconds of loading time for a site that only needs to load its bundle once? Sure its nice for it be faster but the main benefit I thought is you don't need to reload pages as you navigate.
Re: Blazing Fast HTML: Elm vs. React vs. Angular vs. Ember
#7Wow - I'm a big fan of React, so I'm a little disappointed to see that it was the slowest of all.
This post is "benchmarketing". The post says: "Here we add a key to each entry and define shouldComponentUpdate for the Todo component. Essentially the same as what we did in Elm, but we have to write some logic to figure out if a Todo changed. This opens us up to some extremely tricky bugs." The author should instead be using immutable.js, so that checking for changes is object identity checking; it's much faster that way and avoids "extremely tricky bugs".
Re: Blazing Fast HTML: Elm vs. React vs. Angular vs. Ember
#8"Speed in Milliseconds" should be changed to "Time in Milliseconds". More speed is a good thing, but more time is not. Using "speed" instead of "time" in the chart title makes it sound like bigger bars are better, but that's just the opposite. Plus, speed isn't even a measure of time (like milliseconds); it's a unit of distance (or some equivalent) divided by time.
Re: Blazing Fast HTML: Elm vs. React vs. Angular vs. Ember
#9Those benchmarks should be done by someone independent from one of the tested frameworks though. Hard to trust the methodology, especially with Elm emerging as the "winner".
Re: Blazing Fast HTML: Elm vs. React vs. Angular vs. Ember
#10Wow - I'm a big fan of React, so I'm a little disappointed to see that it was the slowest of all.
Honestly benchmarks are useless. I'm sure Elm is "faster" and what not... but does it really matter? React is fast enough for a ton of businesses and people. So is Ember.
Sure, performance is good, but I think mostly bottlenecks are user code and the way the JS/CSS bundle is loaded and delivered. If there's a major performance issue in the framework, just submit a bug report. It'll be fixed.
I'm more interested in how productive I can be and how much fun I can have coding with said framework or language—something both Elm and React do well.