If you are not on a team and don't have any budget requirements, then sure. Do it all from scratch and in your own arbitrary flavored-way in your basement, then write documentation later and put it on hacker news as the next great js framework to use out of plethora already there, then someone writes an article like this and places it on hacker news, then repeat the process again.
Turbolinks: SPA-like Experience without the SPA-framework Hassle
11–20 of 97 posts
Re: Turbolinks: SPA-like Experience without the SPA-framework Hassle
#12The title is misleading since this is basically a TuboLinks article and doesn't really explore the problems of building an SPA without a framework.
Re: Turbolinks: SPA-like Experience without the SPA-framework Hassle
#13It’s just clickbait link spam.
Re: Turbolinks: SPA-like Experience without the SPA-framework Hassle
#14Making your own tools is a great learning experience but probably not the best idea for production processes.
Re: Turbolinks: SPA-like Experience without the SPA-framework Hassle
#15The Answer: Yes, but use this Front End Framework.
Re: Turbolinks: SPA-like Experience without the SPA-framework Hassle
#16Downvoting everyone answering the title question and not reading the article. You guys should be better than this.
It's not about cowboying or NIH. It's about using a library called Turbolinks https://github.com/turbolinks/turbolinks to render static pages server-side and swap the content out with js.
Re: Turbolinks: SPA-like Experience without the SPA-framework Hassle
#17If you are not on a team and don't have any budget requirements, then sure. Do it all from scratch and in your own arbitrary flavored-way in your basement, then write documentation later and put it on hacker news as the next great js framework to use out of plethora already there, then someone writes an article like this and places it on hacker news, then repeat the process again.
I think we've had some of this on the backend too. I've seen "you don't need a framework" a few times outside of the current JS atmosphere.
Seems like the easier it is to get going, the more frameworks you'll get. PHP is similar - a good whack of frameworks. The community has banded together, producing a group of developers, one from each major library or framework just so they can figure it out. It's called the Framework Interoperability Group and is responsible for the PSRs which have done a lot of good for the PHP ecosystem.
JavaScript, I'm not sure you'd have the same luck simply because any interoperability group would need an arena or virtual equivalent just to start. That's ignoring the communication issues and length of decision making time.
Re: Turbolinks: SPA-like Experience without the SPA-framework Hassle
#18If you are not on a team and don't have any budget requirements, then sure. Do it all from scratch and in your own arbitrary flavored-way in your basement, then write documentation later and put it on hacker news as the next great js framework to use out of plethora already there, then someone writes an article like this and places it on hacker news, then repeat the process again.
I think we've had some of this on the backend too. I've seen "you don't need a framework" a few times outside of the current JS atmosphere. Seems like the easier it is to get going, the more frameworks you'll get. PHP is similar - a good whack of frameworks. The community has banded together, producing a group of developers, one from each major library or framework just so they can figure it out. It's called the Fram…
I actually prefer coding by myself as I get to do my own thing but when it comes to working with teams, I strongly prefer a framework because its kind of like how religion helped form alliances or like how a river flows in the same direction. Its all arbitrary bullshit but helps reduce collisions and arguments. After all, highly documented, well tested bullshit, is much better than highly untested, no-documented bullshit.
Re: Turbolinks: SPA-like Experience without the SPA-framework Hassle
#19I know they are trying to promote their own Front-End Framework (while trying to pretend that it isn't one), but with regards to the question on the title, my experience is: you can, but please, don't.
It actually isn't THAT hard, but what will happen is that you'll end up reinventing the wheel badly, and you'll be chasing bugs and fixing platform inconsistencies for months.
It won't be optimized and it won't work in some random obscure browser, or under some random platform (and there's always THAT user that just happens to have that browser/platform combo... Murphy's Law spares no one).
Also remember: YOU have to maintain your poorly cobbled-together "framework" for the next 2, 3, or more years. If anything changes and pages stop working "right", you get to pick up the pieces. Yes, "you", because since your framework is something that you pieced together, there are no "tutorials" nor stack overflow questions nor manuals to refer to.
If someone DOES pick it up after you, (the poor bastards), they are going to be bothering you day and night, or go insane after 2 weeks.
In conclusion, just grab something that works for you and is reasonably well supported (and looks like it will REMAIN supported in the future) and use that. Don't fall into the "NIH syndrome" trap.
Re: Turbolinks: SPA-like Experience without the SPA-framework Hassle
#20I don't think you'll find anyone who thinks it's hard to build 1 SPA without a framework. The thing is that if you build 2, 3, 100, you'll find yourself doing the same stuff over and over again (and always better than the previous time, so that you'll want to replace all your old code, which is now obsolete), and that's when frameworks are useful.
and when you hire and work with others, it's better if they already know and agree with how to do things rather than having to learn your custom SPA.