41–50 of 206 posts
I'm an experienced React developer. I wanted to try out writing a plain vanilla JavaScript application - I enjoy plain JavaScript, it feels close to the metal. It wasn't long before I was craving an application framework that allowed me to cleanly organise and structure my application instead of it rapidly becoming a spaghetti. I also craved the ability to write small simple functions for making components. And I wan…
Please tell me you're joking?
I'm an experienced React developer. I wanted to try out writing a plain vanilla JavaScript application - I enjoy plain JavaScript, it feels close to the metal. It wasn't long before I was craving an application framework that allowed me to cleanly organise and structure my application instead of it rapidly becoming a spaghetti. I also craved the ability to write small simple functions for making components. And I wan…
> it feels close to the metal. Please tell me you're joking?
I of course don't mean close to the CPU that would be silly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You described an SPA. Fetch relevant data and render to controls. Not sure why we need canvas for that.
You are correct. I just inadvertently re-invented React.
React pretty much is just a fast way to determine what to re-render on a page as a result of a state change.
div.parentElement.parentElement.foo()
If little can do a lot just imagine what I can do with few megabytes: Google Gmail/Youtube engineers
Probably a good batch of spaghetti code if you think vanilla can be used for anything serious. Or rewrite react yourself as another commenter already did.
Depending on the scope of the work, this is not allways a bad thing. I like my own framework. It does exactly what I want and I can tweak it to my needs anytime.
But I work alone and don't have to share my code with different developers, otherwise there would be problems ...
I'm an experienced React developer. I wanted to try out writing a plain vanilla JavaScript application - I enjoy plain JavaScript, it feels close to the metal. It wasn't long before I was craving an application framework that allowed me to cleanly organise and structure my application instead of it rapidly becoming a spaghetti. I also craved the ability to write small simple functions for making components. And I wan…
> it feels close to the metal. Please tell me you're joking?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it feels close to the metal. Please tell me you're joking?
I mean he is a React developer after all, less than 3 levels of abstraction is greased lightning.
This is super super minor but it's JavaScript not Javascript. IMO the camel case makes it look so much better :D
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you mind explaining what this does?
Its just a helper function to create an element, assign it some properties, and append children elements. Not very much unlike React in the API (emphasis on "interface") but of course the inner workings is as minimal as possible.
I agree about the nuisance of creating DOM elements. innerHTML is OK if you’re doing static content, but for anything that needs to be dynamic (untrusted input, event handlers, etc.) I have a little tiny helper library that I carry around in my head and write into projects that need it: const $T = text => document.createTextNode(text) function $E(tag, props, kids) { const elem = document.createElement(tag) for (const…
* getNodesByType - allows me to get things like attributes, text, and comments directly
* getAncestor - allows me to get a specified element somewhere between a target element and the document.documentElement