Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Announces React Fiber, a Rewrite of Its React Framework

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 422 posts

Re: Facebook Announces React Fiber, a Rewrite of Its React Framework

#261

Post by ripdog »

troncheadle wrote: post #177
mirsadm wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They may be robust but the user experience still sucks. JS heavy web sites are unresponsive and turn my 3 year old MBP into a vacuum cleaner. Facebook is the best example. I can barely load the web site without the fans spinning. Firefox can't handle it at all. It is unusable for me.

That is crazy. I use Facebook on a 5 year old MBP with no problems. I have Ad Block Pro and U-Block, but even without them, my computer can handle Facebook just fine.

ublock origin is the only adblocker you need. Adblock Plus does the same thing but is less efficient and lets some ads through by default, and ublock is abandoned.

Don't run two ad blockers, they will just use more resources for no benefit.

Re: Facebook Announces React Fiber, a Rewrite of Its React Framework

#262

Post by ocean3 »

segphault wrote: post #119
ng12 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which is the standards-based approach that ES6 actually provides for embedded DSLs and templating. Template literals could not possibly be a replacement for JSX. JSX is Javascript, template literals are strings. JSX isn't a templating language by design, it's one of the primary advantages.

JSX is not JavaScript, it's a non-standard bastardization that will never be supported natively in browsers. Its reliance on JavaScript for flow control is so problematic[1] that people have started working around its many glaring inadequacies by adding new language primitives to JavaScript itself via Babel plugins[2]. I do my templating in template literals because using standards-based JavaScript means that I don't…

Flow control using js is very simple. For the example you linked it should have used smaller components. Jsx is all about components. I cannot go back to string literals.

Re: Facebook Announces React Fiber, a Rewrite of Its React Framework

#263

Post by jolux »

chillacy wrote: post #206
mirsadm wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They may be robust but the user experience still sucks. JS heavy web sites are unresponsive and turn my 3 year old MBP into a vacuum cleaner. Facebook is the best example. I can barely load the web site without the fans spinning. Firefox can't handle it at all. It is unusable for me.

Might be more Firefox than your macbook or the web. I've noticed (while developing an extension) that Firefox feels noticeably more sluggish than Chrome. Safari somehow feels even faster than Chrome, but I'm too tied to the extension ecosystem of Chrome to switch.

Safari is definitely faster than Chrome on Mac.

Re: Facebook Announces React Fiber, a Rewrite of Its React Framework

#264

Post by echelon »

troncheadle wrote: post #149
paganel wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the OP, but I expect the web to be a thing where documents (i.e. mainly text) don't have any issues rendering on my 5-year old phone or on my 8-year laptop (both of which work very well, still, and which I don't plan to replace anytime soon). The recent web practices (I'm talking mostly of the last 2-3 years, since more and more people have started copying Twitter with its launch of its "every website needs to be…

And I would love if my 2001 Honda Accord was compatible with Tesla's autopilot, but I understand it is not a realistic expectation. I'm not sure why you'd expect the web to be a. Mostly text and b. able to render easily on obsolete devices. The web is becoming a robust application delivery platform. That is so, so awesome. Most people do not want to be stuck with shitty looking, text only websites. Moving the platfor…

> The web is becoming a robust application delivery platform.

This was our mistake. I don't want garbage shoved in my face. I want to read. And that's it.

Re: Facebook Announces React Fiber, a Rewrite of Its React Framework

#265

Post by wayfarer2s »

madeofpalk wrote: post #210
lobster_johnson wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fortunately, componentWillMount is largely made redundant by the use of constructors.

Except it's not for when you actually want to know when the component was put into the DOM, or you're running react server-side

> when you actually want to know when the component was put into the DOM

You can use componentDidMount for that and its semantics are still the same.

Re: Facebook Announces React Fiber, a Rewrite of Its React Framework

#266

Post by untog »

Mayzie wrote: post #248

Will React Fibre be utilising WebAssembly for a performance increase, particularly for their virtual DOM? (falling back to JavaScript when possible, of course)

WebAssembly isn't some magic bullet that's going to make every piece of code faster. Anything strongly connected to the DOM is still going to be slow, because the DOM slows things down a lot more than JavaScript does.

Re: Facebook Announces React Fiber, a Rewrite of Its React Framework

#267

Post by taeric »

acjohnson55 wrote: post #144
paganel wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the OP, but I expect the web to be a thing where documents (i.e. mainly text) don't have any issues rendering on my 5-year old phone or on my 8-year laptop (both of which work very well, still, and which I don't plan to replace anytime soon). The recent web practices (I'm talking mostly of the last 2-3 years, since more and more people have started copying Twitter with its launch of its "every website needs to be…

A web limited to textual content is a pretty quaint and uninspiring vision, IMO. The web started that way because static documents are relatively easy to represent, but the future (and present, for that matter) is rich experiences that can be distributed in the same way. But there are many steps left to get there, so either buckle up and help build that future, or get used to an ever-shrinking ecosystem of the purely…

My opinion happens to differ. Textual content is incredibly rich and is likely a target for all content in the future. Consider, we are literally training models to accurately caption things today.

Why? Because language is a hell of an abstraction. More, it is approachable and can often be bounded. Consider, I am not even remotely skilled in art. However, I can adequately describe, for me, a picture by saying who is in it and the event. Try doing the same without language. Often "quaint and uninspiring textual" language.

Do I opine for the what we had in the 90s? Not necessarily. But I do grow weary of folks reinventing frameworks that merely further complicate the very abstractions that they created and now require these frameworks.

Re: Facebook Announces React Fiber, a Rewrite of Its React Framework

#268

Post by camgunz »

mattnewton wrote: post #91
kerkeslager wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Monocultures develop because one tool is far better than all the others. Javascript isn't a monoculture because all the tools are bad.

Monocultures develop because of corporate backing. The web being open and unclaimed is what leads to the great diversity. As someone who does both server and JavaScript development, the tools are not bad. Often times they solve real problems well.

The web is pretty much corporate. All the major tools are built by major corporations, all the browsers are developed by major corporations (with the exception of Firefox, but Mozilla gets most of its money from major corporations) all the major web players are major corporations, all the major web monetization is rented by corporations.

The web's no longer an open platform. Yeah you can put up a blog on your own server using only FOSS. But if you want to drive traffic to it, you're using a huge corporate ad network or some SEO company. If you want to scale it, you're using a huge corporate cloud. If you want to make money on it, you're using a huge corporate ad network.

Re: Facebook Announces React Fiber, a Rewrite of Its React Framework

#269

Post by theWatcher37 »

nkkollaw wrote: post #122
conover wrote: post #16

http://isfiberreadyyet.com/

That must be the slowest-loading page I've visited today, though.

I mean, what did you expect?

Won't be long until someone upgrades their 16-thread 32GB machine because Facebook was "too slow"?

I type this on a dual core phone with 2GB of RAM that's faster than most desktops 15 years ago thinking I need a faster device.

Re: Facebook Announces React Fiber, a Rewrite of Its React Framework

#270

Post by losteric »

copperx wrote: post #93
colordrops wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the way, the OP I responded to said "front-end", not "JavaScript". How does your attitude jive with WebAssembly which will allow you to compile C++ or Rust for the browser?

I've been struggling to understand how WebAssembly will change things on the web. Will you be able to compile an arbitrary C/C++ binary to run on a browser? Will syscalls be emulated? What about the filesystem? It looks like to get such a thing working we would need an OS running on top of JS. But maybe I'm missing something.

> It looks like to get such a thing working we would need an OS running on top of JS. But maybe I'm missing something.

You're not missing anything, that's exactly what's happening. WebGL/VR, WebCL, WebRTC, Filesystem API... the browser is becoming a simple feature-rich client OS for the cloud, and WebAssembly is the machine language.

Post reply on HN