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

The rise of React

increment.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 168 posts

Re: The rise of React

#61

Post by chosenbreed37 »

Ididntdothis wrote: post #58
satya71 wrote: post #8

The only reason I choose React today is the immense ecosystem around it. With every other framework, even though the core framework is capable enough, it feels like I have to reinvent wheels, axles, and more.

Isn't that a failure of the framework developers that not more stuff is in reusable libraries? When I did some Angular I thought that at 70% of the framework should be in libraries that are independent of the framework and reusable.

I think the idea was to keep it as a library rather than a complete all-in-one framework. It has it pros and cons

Re: The rise of React

#62

Post by smnplk »

jcadam wrote: post #59
satya71 wrote: post #8

The only reason I choose React today is the immense ecosystem around it. With every other framework, even though the core framework is capable enough, it feels like I have to reinvent wheels, axles, and more.

Yea, I'm a big fan of mithril.js, but I've moved over to React as my preferred framework primarily for this reason. The fact that the Clojurescript community has embraced it via reagent is a big factor as well.

Clojurescript with reagent and re-frame (or keechma, hoplon and others) outlasted two generations of Javascript technical churn. Nothing comes close.

Re: The rise of React

#64

Post by hombre_fatal »

smnplk wrote: post #62
jcadam wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, I'm a big fan of mithril.js, but I've moved over to React as my preferred framework primarily for this reason. The fact that the Clojurescript community has embraced it via reagent is a big factor as well.

Clojurescript with reagent and re-frame (or keechma, hoplon and others) outlasted two generations of Javascript technical churn. Nothing comes close.

Not really. Remember when people used Om for React bindings in Clojurescript? Clojurescript changes too. React has been around the whole time though.

Also, along the topic in this thread, I've never met someone who used Clojure/script. It's why I ended up just using Node/Javascript in the end. It gets lonely in the Clojure cave.

Re: The rise of React

#65

Post by onion2k »

pmlnr wrote: post #52

> What differentiates websites from one another today isn’t their underlying architecture but their content, design, and editorial. This is bad, this will kill the quirky, fun internet. Monoculture is not good.

No one seems to complain that all of the quirky websites use three.js. That doesn't seem so different to me.

Re: The rise of React

#66

Post by Swizec »

kgin wrote: post #54
andrekandre wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe its "ivory-tower thinking" in the end... that idea alwasy appealed to me to he honest... i guess the thing is its only one small facet of web development, not the whole thing

Same here, I spent so much time making semantic html that felt great but in the end was never consumed semantically by anyone or anything.

Only benefit I get out of keeping my HTML semantic these days is that using 1 div instead of 10 has a big impact on UI performance. Draw fewer DOM nodes is still one of the best bang for buck optimisations you can do.

Re: The rise of React

#67

Post by hombre_fatal »

pmlnr wrote: post #52

> What differentiates websites from one another today isn’t their underlying architecture but their content, design, and editorial. This is bad, this will kill the quirky, fun internet. Monoculture is not good.

I don't get it unless you interpreted that statement inversely. It's the content, not the underlying architecture of a website, that makes in quirky and fun.

Re: The rise of React

#69

Post by cateye »

Wild conspiracy theory: Facebook, Dropbox, Netflix, Reddit made React popular so that web developers can't develop a competing service because of the complexity that it introduces.

Re: The rise of React

#70

Post by hombre_fatal »

toshk wrote: post #7
Swizec wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience that separation of concerns was fake. 15+ years of webdev and I ain’t ever seen a redesign that doesn’t fundamentally change the layout and business logic. Never seen a spec update to logic that doesn’t also change how things look. The coupling is super tight and always has been.

I meant more in the sense that different people could do different jobs. Non-developers/designers were able to do a lot of the frontend stuff. With the "new" complexity of frontend development that's mostly gone. I've seen it a few times with my own eyes that in teams the 1-5 frontenders specialised in html/css had a really hard time switching to react, at the same time more seasoned developers felt like fish in the…

>Non-developers/designers were able to do a lot of the frontend stuff.

This always smells like "nobody could possibly do what we do" developer hubris.

The designers I've worked with on my last three large React projects could edit .jsx/.scss files. I don't really buy the idea that someone can learn web client design but it's jsx or whatever that's too much.

Post reply on HN