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

Remix – A framework focused on web fundamentals and modern UX

remix.run

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 307 posts

Re: Remix – A framework focused on web fundamentals and modern UX

#251

Post by bryans »

Kiro wrote: post #234
archeroe wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like you can't respond to a simple question and prefer Ad hominem. "It's awesome" has never been a proper justification.

No, I don't need to justify anything here. There's no argument to be had. The point is that bryans is claiming the landing page is objectively bad and doesn't seem to accept that we obviously like it. A lot of people have told him why they do but he keeps arguing. No idea why you want to defend such a toxic person.

> The point is that bryans is claiming the landing page is objectively bad and doesn't seem to accept that we obviously like it.

You keep mentioning this "we" as if you speak for the entire world. In reality, there are far more commenters speaking negatively about the site than there are positively.

> A lot of people have told him why they do but he keeps arguing.

You're again suggesting that I shouldn't be allowed to respond to people who replied to me, which is antithetical to how forums work. And, in fact, almost no one has actually articulated why they like it -- they've just said that they like it, while refusing to acknowledge any negative aspects.

> No idea why you want to defend such a toxic person.

The irony here is very rich -- you calling other people toxic, when all you've done so far is tell me that I shouldn't be allowed to express my opinions, all because you don't personally agree with those opinions.

Re: Remix – A framework focused on web fundamentals and modern UX

#252

Post by bryans »

Kiro wrote: post #239
bryans wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You won't convince anyone with your lousy attitude and obnoxious arguments. Well, except for the 50+ people who upvoted my comments and the dozens of people who made similar commentary about the website -- but I guess they don't count as real people because they don't agree with you?

You didn't convince anyone. They already agreed with you. Some people like it, some people don't but it's all subjective no matter how hard you try to prove otherwise.

You keep trying to assert that nobody should ever have a discussion about subjective topics, but there's a reason why standardization exists, and those standards are born out of discussions where people disagree.

> You didn't convince anyone. They already agreed with you.

You're right, I should have assumed that you know everyone on the site and surveyed them after my comments to determine that, in fact, zero people found any of my arguments convincing.

Re: Remix – A framework focused on web fundamentals and modern UX

#253

Post by nolok »

danr4 wrote: post #18

I usually have deep hatred towards scroll-jacking but this was actually quite well done. Not because of the pizzazz but because it essentially put only one thing to learn on the screen at once. It was like a "getting started" section that might be slower to go through but feels like it's faster to understand.

More importantly for me, it doesn't screw with me if I don't want to do it at their rythm and scroll fast anyway. So many site with their accelerate / decelerate / transitions end up being horrible to use if you're a quick reader, theirs doesn't.

I don't quite like the low information density it uses, but at least it doesn't take away my control. I prefer that a site doesn't do it at all, but if they do they should at least do it this way !

Re: Remix – A framework focused on web fundamentals and modern UX

#254

Post by bryans »

Kiro wrote: post #242
bryans wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could say the same thing about your commentary -- sounds like you just can't accept the fact that people don't like it -- which ought to tell you just how obnoxious you're acting right now. Unless you have something new to add to the conversation, it's beyond trollish to repeatedly assert that I shouldn't be allowed to speak my mind (or even respond to people who replied to me) just because I don't agree with you.

I've said nothing of the sort. I do however have a problem with you aggressively arguing that there's an objective truth [1] and patronizing every explanation you get for why people like it [2]. No-one has said you can't have an opinion. Good try though. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29315836 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29316485

> I've said nothing of the sort. [...] No-one has said you can't have an opinion.

You've told me to "accept it and move on" at least three times, which is an assertion that I shouldn't comment or express my opinion. So yes, you said exactly something of the sort, multiple times. That you're trying to convince me otherwise is some extreme gaslighting.

> I do however have a problem with you aggressively arguing

You're greatly exaggerating any perceived aggression. You try to make it sound like I'm some troll resorting to name-calling, when all I've actually done is provide detailed arguments based on actual experience. You're welcome to interpret them as aggressive or patronizing or whatever you like, but that's entirely subjective, ironically.

If anything, I'd say repeatedly replying to all of my comments and telling me to "move on" is far more aggressive than anything I've said.

> that there's an objective truth

Again, you're pretending that neither standardization nor subject matter experts exist.

Re: Remix – A framework focused on web fundamentals and modern UX

#255

Post by couchand »

SavantIdiot wrote: post #134
couchand wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> JavaScript allows getter/setter methods that can update the DOM when a value changes; this includes before/after and around-like methods that can integrate AJAX calls in a VARAIBLE name. e.g., you access the variable and an AJAX call fires and updates your DOM when the data returns with you doing ZERO coding. Maybe I'm old but that sounds TERRIBLE. When my code is doing something expensive like a network call, I wa…

Sure, that's one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is you just removed 300 lines of buggy redundant code into one line that does exactly the same thing but without all the fuss. And now that your code is so small you can understand it better, and test it. Also, there's this "new" thing called async/await: javascript is built on deferred execution, so you don't block on expensive calls. PHP is a dinosaur. R…

> Another way to look at it is you just removed 300 lines of buggy redundant code into one line that does exactly the same thing but without all the fuss. And now that your code is so small you can understand it better, and test it.

Maybe I'm missing something critical here, but the code doesn't go away, does it? You still have to have the AJAX implementation, it's just that instead of the intention-revealing interface of a call to something like fetch you have an intention-obscuring interface of magic properties.

The code still has to live somewhere, even if you've swept it under the rug. But now when you walk across that rug it's real easy to trip.

Re: Remix – A framework focused on web fundamentals and modern UX

#256

Post by couchand »

ducharmdev wrote: post #151
couchand wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> JavaScript allows getter/setter methods that can update the DOM when a value changes; this includes before/after and around-like methods that can integrate AJAX calls in a VARAIBLE name. e.g., you access the variable and an AJAX call fires and updates your DOM when the data returns with you doing ZERO coding. Maybe I'm old but that sounds TERRIBLE. When my code is doing something expensive like a network call, I wa…

Is this really new though? MVVM .NET apps similarly use getters & setters in this manner, except with XAML.

I've never seen .NET code that has magic properties hiding expensive operations, though my .NET experience is admittedly limited. Is that idiomatic?

Re: Remix – A framework focused on web fundamentals and modern UX

#257

Post by franga2000 »

efdee wrote: post #219
kome wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's not the right format for the medium. slides are ok in class, or during a meeting - the web is different.

You're watching a presentation about a framework. What makes slides such a bad fit for it?

Slides are presented to you, web content is something you read. Slides can have more graphical elements and animations because they don't carry the full information load - most of that is spoken. You wouldn't do a presentation by giving out flash drives with the slide deck and then leaving.

Re: Remix – A framework focused on web fundamentals and modern UX

#258

Post by SwiftyBug »

patwoz wrote: post #181

The biggest complain for me about nextjs is the testing part. Did you ever tried to create a Monorepo which includes nextjs and want to run integration tests like any other react app with react-testing-library? Good luck. The integrated routing solution makes it really hard. There is a Community solution to named „next-page-tester“, but nothing official. That’s much better with gatsby and it’s built-in usage of reach…

I would bet on that, given that Kent C. Dodds has been almost annoyingly speaking about Remix in the past few months (he's been hired last week) and that he is obsessed with testing.

Re: Remix – A framework focused on web fundamentals and modern UX

#259

Post by haolez »

elwell wrote: post #123
haolez wrote: post #79

Off topic: this is the best landing page I've ever seen on a mobile device. Keep scrolling down for some surprises!

You got me to keep trying to scroll at the bottom of the page like an idiot hoping for easter eggs.

I thought the part with the loading icons and clap emojis surprising. Sorry about that :)

Re: Remix – A framework focused on web fundamentals and modern UX

#260

Post by haolez »

azangru wrote: post #113
haolez wrote: post #79

Off topic: this is the best landing page I've ever seen on a mobile device. Keep scrolling down for some surprises!

Which device did you view it on? I tried to view it in mobile Chrome on a Samsung Galaxy S7, and apart from the page not fitting the screen, there were quite a few visual bugs. If I hadn't viewed this page on a laptop before, I would have been discouraged.

Android Chrome on Galaxy Note 10+.
Post reply on HN