I can only think that modern front end development has failed • Hacker News Board

Re: I can only think that modern front end development has failed

#231

Post by rdel » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 6:03 PM UTC

q-big wrote: post #164

Drew_ wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You start a new project with a framework, and it seems like there is this whole area of your project that is essentially a black box, ready to break (or misbehave) any time. Any framework you're not familiar with will feel like this. This isn't something unique to frontend frameworks.

> Any framework you're not familiar with will feel like this. This isn't something unique to frontend frameworks. But the frameworks get out of fashion faster than you can obtain deep knowledge of them.

What framework was popular 4 years ago and is now unmaintained? This is a common remark that was true maybe 10 years ago but hasn’t been in quite a while. React, Angular, and Vue all have dedicated maintainers and millions of users, and have for several years now.

Re: I can only think that modern front end development has failed

#232

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 6:03 PM UTC

CM30 wrote: post #22

This topic seems to come up on Hacker News every few months or so. Not saying the post is necessarily wrong there, but it's certainly something people here love discussing nonetheless. As for why front end development may be a bit of a mess here? Well, it's really a problem that doesn't have just one cause. On the one hand, business pressures likely have a huge impact here. Companies love analytics, tracking, ads, et…

[deleted]

Re: I can only think that modern front end development has failed

#233

Post by uncledave » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 6:05 PM UTC

bit_logic wrote: post #156

What upsets and concerns me the most is when I see poorly developed SPA on really important sites. For example, government service application websites. If reddit or nytimes has a bloated, intermittently failing SPA site, that's an annoyance. When it's a form to apply for unemployment, ACA health care, DMV, or other critical services, it's a critical failure. Especially since these services are most often used by exa…

Yes definitely.

I was surprised recently as I had to fill in a massive form based site for UK NHS mental health survey stuff. The site appeared as a flat background old style early 2000’s sort of thing with bits of comic sans in it. I nearly died when I first saw it expecting a shit show.

But it turned out to be responsive and fast. It worked perfectly from end to end and had little to no JavaScript. It was by far the best thing I’ve used for years. There were over 100 page transitions in total. It wasn’t an SPA but a classic web site with little or no intelligence. Seemed to be backed by python.

I want this back.

Re: I can only think that modern front end development has failed

#234

Post by Drew_ » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 6:06 PM UTC

okareaman wrote: post #210

Drew_ wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Standard React could still be a bloated mess. React is ~6KB (even less g-zipped). React is very performant and its performance was one of it's original claims to fame over previous frontend frameworks like Angular.

As I said, it's not the size of the React library that's the problem: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26691150

There is no additional overhead in nesting React components vs normal HTML elements. React-rendered and normally rendered HTML are identical.

Re: I can only think that modern front end development has failed

#235

Post by uncledave » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 6:07 PM UTC

WickyNilliams wrote: post #211

devit wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which framework?

If my memory serves me right, it's Python/Django. I contracted in that department a few years ago. Edit: Just remembered it's all open source too! Look here and search for repos beginning "eq-". Survey runner is the app I believe. When I was there the plan was to use that, though perhaps they eventually wrote a fresh app. Anyway the code should all be there https://github.com/ONSdigital?q=Eq&type=&language=&sort=

That was notably one of the best web experiences I’ve used recently. Gov.uk is exceptionally good.

Re: I can only think that modern front end development has failed

#236

Post by simion314 » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 6:10 PM UTC

BlueTemplar wrote: post #112

simion314 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that nobody can create anew browser engine because you not only need to implement all the standards you also need to make your browser work with broken html and work in the same way Chrome and Firefox work. IMO we would need 2 split the document part from the application part. Have a set of elements and a document format just for blogs and news websites , and more complex components and APIs for applic…

That first part is the Web, while the second part are native programs with Internet connection.

I think you could have web rich documents with basic interactivity and as an option web application that are "native app like" , with tons of APIs for camera/microphone , bluetooth, canvas, 3d , complex sound APIs.

We have to admit that rich web application can be very usefull, even during Java or Flash days we known that sometimes you need an animation or a simulation on a page to better present some content.

Though it makes you think if we had an 100% open source Flash, then you could have used it for complex SPA like Figma while keeping all the bloat into an optional plugin , if the plugin was optional developers would not be tempted to use it unless is needed and it it was needed they would have use something like Flex (a Flash GUI tookit) and not reinvent the wheel constantly.

Re: I can only think that modern front end development has failed

#237

Post by okareaman » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 6:10 PM UTC

tpict wrote: post #213

okareaman wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the size of the React library that is the problem, it's the nesting of components with components within components that is the problem. If you've ever shown source and seen divs 20 to 30 deep, you're most likely looking at html that React produces.

A React component has no obligation to add a div or any other element to the DOM tree.

Dan Ambramov has stated the reason hooks was created was to avoid nesting hell that was used to manage state. I may be misunderstanding him. I am not s React expert.

Re: I can only think that modern front end development has failed

#238

Post by okareaman » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 6:10 PM UTC

Drew_ wrote: post #234

okareaman wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I said, it's not the size of the React library that's the problem: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26691150

There is no additional overhead in nesting React components vs normal HTML elements. React-rendered and normally rendered HTML are identical.

Dan Ambramov has stated the reason hooks was created was to avoid nesting hell that was used to manage state. I may be misunderstanding him. I am not s React expert.

Re: I can only think that modern front end development has failed

#239

Post by stevenicr » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 6:11 PM UTC

ryanSrich wrote: post #144

And yet, “performance improvements” are often the excuse for making every single site and web app look the exact same. Dull, flat, ugly, homogeneous design has sucked all the life out of the web. Remember flash? Remember when websites were cool? Where it was fun and exciting to go to certain sites simply because of how they were designed? Remember the early days of CSS 3 experimentation? But but but! Skeuomorphism is…

I concur with most of the sentiment here- and am happy to push much blame to big google, pointing out that if you are not in google you basically don't exist on the web - (and for many on the planet if you are not in fbook than you are not on the internet) - when google says google web vitals, speed all that ranks you in the top or you are not in the top and you become invisible - it's a thing.

However I think the global move away from desktop computing to phones, ipads and cheap chromebooks are the real fun killer for great art and design.

I used to love making sites pixel perfect at 1024 - and today if we spend a lot of time making fancy desgins - most people will never see it, since they are checking it out via phone surfing.

This is what I point to for people inquiring about design today - basically it's up to the client to provide the design - what pictures and text do you want to put on the small screen? that's your design.

Even if you put a note on the small screen telling people to visit our Hd/Desktop version for more cool effects they would enjoy - many (most?) people don't even have a way to access a large screen for computing.

Maybe there will be a shift with people casting to TVs and 'smart tvs' browsing better and turn the tide - then we'll need some kind of 'report back framework' to tell us people can see and navigate via the larger view - then we could try to remake flash coolness via html video for the big screen - but then we wouldn't know how close they are to the TV - so how large would navi buttons and pop up text need to be.. meh - back to basic plain stuff.

Personally I think we need better zoom-in controls for browsers that people can easily use and understand - this could give us more flexibility as designers, like the hamburger menu - if you can expect people to know how to use it - not holding my breath though.

Re: I can only think that modern front end development has failed

#240

Post by leephillips » Sun, Apr 04, 2021, 6:14 PM UTC

johnfn wrote: post #221

leephillips wrote: post #40

I am not an expert chef. I can cook pretty well, and my guests enjoy my food. But it doesn’t compare to what a professional chef can do. I am not an expert abdominal surgeon. If we are in Antarctica and your appendix becomes inflamed, I will try to save you by cutting it out. But you will probably die. I am not an expert front-end developer. I make sites for myself, for others, and have even been paid for it a few ti…

It's kind of like saying that you as an amateur chef can out-cook the line cook at a cafeteria who prepares a thousand meals because your best-prepared meal is better than their offering. That actually may be true for that specific case. And sure, your site works great when a couple of people look at it. But what happens when you direct the entirety of the NYT's traffic to it to see how it does?

No, not at all. It is more like saying that I make better food than almost all restaurants in town. Which of course is not true, and that’s the point. Because I do make better websites than almost any I come across in the wild.

Your question about handling traffic is orthogonal to the topic of design. The answer is that any of my sites would do better, given the same server architecture, because I deliberately limit the amount that needs to be transferred for any particular page.