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

Guide to JavaScript Frameworks

javascriptreport.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 244 posts

Re: Guide to JavaScript Frameworks

#211

Post by RobertRoberts »

expertentipp wrote: post #143
electrotype wrote: post #110

I'm still using Jquery and some of the millions js libraries available only when you do not bind yourself to a SPA framework taking control of the DOM. And it work pretty well I must say! My opinion is that for 80% of the websites out there, a SPA framework is not only overkill, but is also a bad choice. Your website is probably not Gmail or Facebook. Server side rendering is perfectly fine. We should start a competi…

Web 1.0 (html and hyperlinks) is still valid and working perfectly. Web 2.0 (AJAX and DHTML) is still valid and working perfectly. Web 3.0 ([MVC][MVC][MVC][MVC]) is basically a fully client side application. It takes a professional to identify which solution will be the most optimal given the requirements. ...and yeah - most likely you don't need React+Rxjs+Redux for a wizard-like prev/next multi-select online-quiz,…

Nope, I think regular people are completely able to judge.

Which do you prefer, Youtube from a couple years ago, where every page was a page? Or now, where every page is 15 weird loads of something with blank blocks and comments taking a minute or more to display?

Regular users' opinions should matter more than a developers, as they are the ones who use it.

Re: Guide to JavaScript Frameworks

#212

Post by RobertRoberts »

debaserab2 wrote: post #161
LeoNatan25 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not specifically the DOM modification but the way those frameworks are designed. With React you have hundreds of dependencies, which have hundreds of dependencies. You lost me right there.

React has zero dependencies to use it, actually. https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/package.json

Can you use react without Node or NPM or a compiler/transpiler or build tool?

Re: Guide to JavaScript Frameworks

#213

Post by expertentipp »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #211
expertentipp wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Web 1.0 (html and hyperlinks) is still valid and working perfectly. Web 2.0 (AJAX and DHTML) is still valid and working perfectly. Web 3.0 ([MVC][MVC][MVC][MVC]) is basically a fully client side application. It takes a professional to identify which solution will be the most optimal given the requirements. ...and yeah - most likely you don't need React+Rxjs+Redux for a wizard-like prev/next multi-select online-quiz,…

Nope, I think regular people are completely able to judge. Which do you prefer, Youtube from a couple years ago, where every page was a page? Or now, where every page is 15 weird loads of something with blank blocks and comments taking a minute or more to display? Regular users' opinions should matter more than a developers, as they are the ones who use it.

In case of youtube the clients are copyright owners and advertisers, not users/viewers. Apparently for the former two this is the perfect experience.

Re: Guide to JavaScript Frameworks

#214

Post by krapp »

scarecrowbob wrote: post #168
ptr_void wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to learn Vue, here's a great 3 hour starter that doesn't use any fancy setup - just specifically about Vue: 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utJGnK9D_UQ 2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulHt78ad890 3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ez0y_XKtEIc

Yeah, In my day to day work I do a little bit more than the OP and know some react/webpack and such. But the last time I needed something a little complicated I ended up using VueJS. If you don't want to do it the "right" way (ie, a whole build system and such) you can just toss the file onto the page with a script tag and get to work with your scripting wherever you feel good about doing that.

> If you don't want to do it the "right" way (ie, a whole build system and such) you can just toss the file onto the page with a script tag and get to work with your scripting wherever you feel good about doing that.

The "wrong" way, in this case, is not only the "right" way, but the only way. Any javascript framework, no matter how esoteric or abstract, has to wind up generating one or more javascript files to be called by script tags in an HTML document.

And any framework that recognizes this and just tells me up front where a prebuilt script is that I can just include and use is a plus in my book.

Re: Guide to JavaScript Frameworks

#215

Post by _Tev »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #208
csallen wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ember isn't gone or anything close to it.

Not to be a jerk, but can you provide any links to large sites or apps that use Ember? Again,this is a serious question, as I like to keep tabs on trends for JS stuff like this.

LinkedIn uses ember, but other than that I have not heard about big examples either.

Re: Guide to JavaScript Frameworks

#216

Post by _Tev »

adjkant wrote: post #57
3pt14159 wrote: post #50

The rumours of Ember's demise are greatly exaggerated. I have yet to hear of people making the same amount in any other framework. Seniors are making $200k to $500k in remote positions (the people I know live in Toronto, but they could be anywhere). It is hard to learn, and I'm far from an expert, but the highest I've heard another JS developer who knew both Angular and React completely and he was responsible for mig…

I'd point out that often rare and often unused skills get higher pay due to simple supply and demand. I've heard similar salary ranges for Assembly programmers for example. Angular and React are widely used, and there are many people out there that know them. No need to pay a ton. > The problem with Ember is the learning curve because it doesn't usually let you take shortcuts. I'm guessing that's precisely one of the…

> Why train an entire dev team on it only to have half leave in a year

Errr, Ember is the most stable of currently used JS frameworks. And generally this whole "change JS framework every year" meme is crazily overblown.

Re: Guide to JavaScript Frameworks

#217

Post by Can_Not »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #210
Klathmon wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any information or statistics or studies to add, or did you just want to post your quippy oneliner?

I would actually like to know if there's a list of systems, apps, sites, whatever, that are using any particular framework. Using data from Stackoverflow or NPM downloads just isn't the same as real-world examples of actual use.

Have you tried https://stackshare.io/ ?

Re: Guide to JavaScript Frameworks

#218

Post by mmargerum »

_fol8 wrote: post #7

Reasons why Vue will rock your socks off - Don't need to know jsx! - Sane way of scripting puts the script in an object and each component is html javascript css - Event buses allow sharing of variables between child components without either redux or pushing variables down one child at a time (finally!) - v-for looping is saner than reacts mapping - v-if allows v-if statements without renderIf component or multiple…

The reason I prefer vue/vuex over react/redux is that I can mutate my days structures instead of pretending JS supports immutable data structures .

Re: Guide to JavaScript Frameworks

#219

Post by Can_Not »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #85
aaron-lebo wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's ok, the people who have picked a weekend to learn it feel sorry for those stuck in 2005 web design, too! Sometimes I think web devs specifically and devs in general forget just how much you have to know to get started even with something "easy" like Django. You gotta know HTML (it gets new features, too), CSS, SQL, Python, Javascript, and the tools necessary to each of them. You gotta learn all that while a fram…

I'm not a web dev (I'm backend/HW communications). But I dabble. For me, it's not that I don't understand all of this (it's all relatively simple). I just don't want to do so much just to get something on the screen.

I've used webpack for well over a year now, and while there is a lot to learn in webpack if you really wanted to write your own config or just learn for learning's sake, you really don't need to learn it to dabble. The thing that makes comments like these absurd is that you really need to learn almost nothing about webpack, grunt, gulp, broccoli, rollup, etc. Just to dabble. Almost all of the boilerplates and starter kits do this for you.

Re: Guide to JavaScript Frameworks

#220

Post by debaserab2 »

RobertRoberts wrote: post #212
debaserab2 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

React has zero dependencies to use it, actually. https://github.com/facebook/react/blob/master/package.json

Can you use react without Node or NPM or a compiler/transpiler or build tool?

Of course - just pop it in a script tag and use the React object functions to render your DOM (which is exactly what transpiled code does)
Post reply on HN