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

301–310 of 422 posts

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

#301

Post by ng12 »

monkmartinez wrote: post #295
fenomas wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And thus, yet another insipid "hey let's argue about JS fatigue!" comment clobbers another HN comment page, with 100+ replies not one of which has anything to do with TFA .

If it wasn't a problem, it wouldn't be upvoted. That is how voting works. I'm not a JavaScript programmer, although I have dabbled extensively in the past. My impression of this thread is that not much has changed in that world. Sencha, titanium, and Phonegap were super hot back in the day, along with jQuery, SproutCore, Knockout and Backbone. Now it is all different for JS. That fuckng sucks.

It's such a dumb argument that boils down to "things are changing and I don't like it!". Javascript fatigue is not real. I am completely convinced anyone who says otherwise has never had to maintain a non-trivial web application in Backbone/jQuery -- meaning they're complaining about frameworks that weren't built for their use cases.

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

#302

Post by BigJono »

kuschku wrote: post #146
acemarke wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment seems to be a bit of a non-sequitur. Application development is complex, period. Posix development is complicated. Qt is big and complicated. Makefiles are complicated. Autotools is complicated. Big Java server apps are complicated. C++ is complicated. We've just hit the point where people are trying to do the same thing in a browser. Would you prefer to build your application using Make, Scons, Waf, CMa…

> Would you prefer to build your application using Make, Scons, Waf, CMake, QMake, Tup, Bash scripts, Maven, Gradle, Ant, Buck, or something else? The build tool question is _totally_ solved, right? :) Yes. I've worked with CMake, Gradle, Maven, Ant, with webpack, makefiles, and the entire rest. And you know what? I went back to ES5, just because it's easier than fighting the JS environment. Comparing your average bu…

With what webpack config though?

Half the problem with the web stack is inexperienced people making things way more complicated than they need to be. A minimal webpack.config is pretty damn simple.

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

#303

Post by sgustard »

paganel wrote: post #49
colordrops wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about others but I tire of these comments chiding the "out of control" front-end ecosystem. The situation has already changed years ago. We aren't going to get off of your lawn while you continue to beat a dead horse. The web is built on open standards and there are billions of pages and apps out there. To expect web development to be a perfect monoculture is a failure of your imagination and ability to…

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…

Ten years ago MapQuest was state of the art, and you'd click "next tile" over and over to traverse a map. Then Google Maps showed up with its voodoo ajax and infinite scroll and ushered in the modern web app era. Sure, some folks overdo it, but I'm not going back.

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

#304

Post by douche »

ng12 wrote: post #301
monkmartinez wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it wasn't a problem, it wouldn't be upvoted. That is how voting works. I'm not a JavaScript programmer, although I have dabbled extensively in the past. My impression of this thread is that not much has changed in that world. Sencha, titanium, and Phonegap were super hot back in the day, along with jQuery, SproutCore, Knockout and Backbone. Now it is all different for JS. That fuckng sucks.

It's such a dumb argument that boils down to "things are changing and I don't like it!". Javascript fatigue is not real. I am completely convinced anyone who says otherwise has never had to maintain a non-trivial web application in Backbone/jQuery -- meaning they're complaining about frameworks that weren't built for their use cases.

Javascript fatigue is real. Shit in front-end land changes so fast it is impossible to keep up with.

We just finished a rewrite from jQuery to Angular 1, with updates to all the tooling that goes along with it. We're now at least three years behind the curve... Hooray!

Meanwhile, the backend frameworks we've been using have had one minor version Nuget package release in the same timespan.

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

#305

Post by [deleted] »

kerkeslager wrote: post #254
ng12 wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you are totally wrong about that. This is the most exciting time to be a web developer since jQuery first came out. I promise it only looks that way from the outside.

I am very much not looking at it from the outside. ES6 is a step backward. Prototypical inheritance was one of the few things Javascript had going for it, but because CS majors who only learned Java in undergrad couldn't be bothered to learn prototypical inheritance now we have two incompatible inheritance systems instead. Promises are minor syntactic sugar over callbacks which could be implemented as a library. Mean…

[deleted]

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

#306

Post by fulafel »

segphault wrote: post #101
dntrkv wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Browsers and JavaScript are what we have, we can't magically replace every browser and JS implementation in the world. We have to figure out where we want to go and slowly get there. That is exactly what is happening in the frontend world and that is why there is so much churn. Browser apps have to work across 4 major browsers with versions going back almost 10 years, an infinite amount of screen sizes, and a near in…

> And the other great thing about these tools is you can add/remove them as needed. In order to get that freedom, you need to build the tooling in such a way that it aligns with the web standards, so that when the standards catch up you can drop what you don't actually need anymore. We all switched from coffescript to ES6 and Babel because ES6, being standards-based, will eventually be supported in browsers, right? A…

> We all switched from coffescript to ES6 and Babel because ES6, being standards-based, will eventually be supported in browsers, right?

No, a lot of us switched to ClojureScript, TypeScript, Elm, etc and don't look back.

As long as you have to transpile, why not transpile from a good language? (Not to say that native ES6 support would compensate for the advantages of the abovementioned languages)

Standards are not generally virtuous in programming languages. They tend to come about to mitigate language fragmentation between rival factions, something that most good and popular languages don't have a problem with.

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

#307

Post by fredsted »

eropple wrote: post #92
EugeneOZ wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rust, PHP had simple af builds/packaging. So no, not everything is complex, just old dinosaurs AND web.

PHP's packaging was only "simple af" until you had a binary dependency that wasn't part of your operating system. Complicated things exist.

Doesn't composer do that? Ie. https://packagist.org/packages/anam/phantomjs-linux-x86-bina...

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

#308

Post by ng12 »

douche wrote: post #304
ng12 wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's such a dumb argument that boils down to "things are changing and I don't like it!". Javascript fatigue is not real. I am completely convinced anyone who says otherwise has never had to maintain a non-trivial web application in Backbone/jQuery -- meaning they're complaining about frameworks that weren't built for their use cases.

Javascript fatigue is real. Shit in front-end land changes so fast it is impossible to keep up with. We just finished a rewrite from jQuery to Angular 1, with updates to all the tooling that goes along with it. We're now at least three years behind the curve... Hooray! Meanwhile, the backend frameworks we've been using have had one minor version Nuget package release in the same timespan.

Angular 1 is 7 years old. And guess what? It's still a perfectly valid framework to build a web application with. There is no "curve".

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

#309

Post by nine_k »

toyg wrote: post #297
azernik wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The success of the JavaScript stack was not dependent on source being shipped to the browser, and the push for WebAssembly​ is not motivated by keeping source away from the browser.

What? It absolutely was. Whole generations of today's JS people trained themselves with View Source.

....decompiling minified Javascript?

Sorry, this ship has sailed.

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

#310

Post by tannhaeuser »

jfoutz wrote: post #112
jpk wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It won't happen because none of them will implement the other guy's new thing. Chrome would do the Google thing, Edge would do the Microsoft thing, and Firefox would sit back and balk that none of that junk is standardized. Then webdevs would just stick with Javascript and friends because it's the only thing that mostly works everywhere. That's exactly what happened to Dart, right? It had aspirations of hopping into…

Mozilla is probably in the best position to do something. If it's good enough to get developers to switch and rave about it, ms and google will follow to keep mindshare.

JavaScript was invented by Netscape, the predecessor of Mozilla. Also Firefox came out in a phase of browser stagnation, but Chrome in particular and the other browsers are so powerful today that I'm more worried we're going to loose web standards to "whatever WebKit does". So I wouln't hold my breath.
Post reply on HN