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

Parcel: Fast, zero configuration web application bundler

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 98 posts

Re: Parcel: Fast, zero configuration web application bundler

#81

Post by h1d »

mattbreeden wrote: post #35

I hate doing javascript. I have no desire to attempt to understand or mess with JS or build systems past the bare minimum I can manage to get a project working so I can move on with my life. So I tried using this. It was nice while what I was doing fit inside of everything that was default settings and/or what maintainers used. As soon as I stepped outside of that I ran into things like having to hope someone impleme…

Are you comparing that as a new web pack user or you're already used to it with a bias of your "hate" toward new JS stuff?

Perhaps your problem will be solved as parcel takes more time for third parties to fill those small niches.

Re: Parcel: Fast, zero configuration web application bundler

#82

Post by Fifer82 »

jf- wrote: post #74

I think the ultimate solution to bundling is to go the way of the CLIs, and Angular CLI in particular, where the framework team configures a sensible default bundle config with a few options exposed via the CLI. The user can then build with a single command and everything just works. The user can eject from the CLI and configure manually if needs be, but most of the time that won’t be necessary. Bundlers probably hav…

What is WebPack and SystemJS? I am being tongue in cheek but I totally agree. See all this bundling stuff? Nothing is more boring and lifeless to me personally and Angular CLI has shielded me from all of it. Really great project.

The only real problem I am having is lazy loading and dynamic component's. I am being forced really to add routes to lazy load some heavy components but I would really like not to have to deal with that. I believe there is a way to use SystemJS to load dynamic components at runtime but there is scant information and have no interest to pursue it. A small price to pay.

Re: Parcel: Fast, zero configuration web application bundler

#83

Post by ksec »

thatswrong0 wrote: post #47
ivanfon wrote: post #18

Is something really wrong with WebPack? Didn’t we decide that we want more modularity and plugins, instead of “zero configuration” solutions that lock you into a few technologies? What about the next hip new frameworks that release in the future? Will they just be piled into parcel, or will they add a plugin system? This seems like an unsustainable model.

Caching and parallelization are my complaints with WebPack. WebPack doesn't cache that well out of the box, and plugins like HardSource seem to have errors often enough that they're kind of annoying. WebPack also doesn't have parallelization built in, so you need something like HappyPack. Maybe I was doing something stupid, but I wasn't able to get HappyPack and HardSource to work together nicely.

>Caching and parallelization are my complaints with WebPack

I thought those were fixed in v4?

Re: Parcel: Fast, zero configuration web application bundler

#84

Post by codecurve »

I love the idea of Parcel but I've struggled with a number of non-obvious problems when using it on hobby projects.

° Sourcemaps not working (wrong files / no source translation)

° Randomly losing exports (a module with multiple exports where one of them ends up as an empty object - fix by clearing cache and restarting)

° Errors like "module 71b not found"

° Hot module reload enabled by default, meaning that all top level code runs again when you reload the code (e.g. here's an extra canvas in your dom)

My preferred zero config setup for hobby projects has become [1] and a live reload server[2].

If I'm working on a React project then I will always use Create React App when I can[3].

When I take something beyond the hobby stage and into maintaining it as an ongoing project, I use TypeScript Quickstart[4]—to abstract the underlying Webpack config and start writing code immediately.

I'll only reach for Webpack when I know that I need more flexibility than any of these other tools offer—which isn't very often.

[1]: https://jakearchibald.com/2017/es-modules-in-browsers/

[2]: https://github.com/tapio/live-server

[3]: https://github.com/facebook/create-react-app

[4]: https://github.com/danprince/typescript-quickstart

Re: Parcel: Fast, zero configuration web application bundler

#86

Post by h1d »

Jasper_ wrote: post #40

I spent the day finally adding a modern build system / bundler to my side project, and I chose Parcel. Parcel is really cool! I really wish they'd stop calling it "zero-configuration". It has configuration options (--out-dir, --public-url), there's just no configuration file for them. I really wish they would make one, since it's annoying to have your configuration be hidden in a batch file.

There aren't many options you can specify, besides we have enough .json in the root folder.

Re: Parcel: Fast, zero configuration web application bundler

#87

Post by h1d »

spankalee wrote: post #56
oweiler wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except we don't have great modules support in the browser.

Chrome, Safari, Firefox and Edge support modules. Firefox is landing import.meta.url and working on dynamic import() now.

Except IE11 will still be around for a while. Till 2020 and 2025 for extended support.

Re: Parcel: Fast, zero configuration web application bundler

#88

Post by h1d »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #69

Just tried it quickly; didn't work. It did something and then I got a blank page. Probably some config missing that it needs but the point is: no zero conf and doesn't work as advertised.

What's the point of posting a problem without actually describing it?

People who haven't tried can't even tell if you just screwed it up or there's actually a problem.

Re: Parcel: Fast, zero configuration web application bundler

#89

Post by gvalkov »

For a recent project (with modest needs), I just used a short makefile[1] and plain ES5. I found the experience refreshing as there is definitely peace of mind in depending on one less black box.

There is indeed something uncomfortable about a big node_modules directory or a magic build tool. It's almost like bathophobia, where instead of depths there is 3rd-party javascript code.

[1]: https://github.com/gvalkov/tailon-next/blob/master/frontend/...

Re: Parcel: Fast, zero configuration web application bundler

#90

Post by h1d »

oweiler wrote: post #54
jacobsimon wrote: post #13

I've used used Parcel for a few projects this year and really enjoyed it for the most part. I've found it's basically effortless for building static projects, but its lack of documentation can be frustrating when errors pop up (e.g. I was stuck on an older version for a while due to some issue with a newer release) and I still haven't quite figured out the best pattern for extracting the hashed bundle names for use i…

Webpack's zero config is a joke.

I haven't tried Webpack 4 but can you describe what's so bad with its zero config?
Post reply on HN