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

Next.js 14

nextjs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 157 posts

Re: Next.js 14

#111

Post by leerob »

BoorishBears wrote: post #102
garganzol wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where are people dissatisfied with Next migrating?

If you're down with the paradigm of Next.js App Router, Remix is just a strictly better version. If you're not you stick with pages router and get ready to fork as soon as they drop it. (Just don't ask when that will be https://www.reddit.com/r/reactjs/comments/156m504/comment/jt... ) _ Edit since I got rate limited: DevRel at Vercel replied to this trying to spin Remix not supporting RSC as a differentiator. It does…

Remix is like the Next.js Pages Router + a helper similar to Server Actions. It does not support Server Components (what the App Router uses) and they're exploring using RSC in the future. So definitely different.

For example, `getServerSideProps` in Next.js is the same as a `loader` in Remix.

Re: Next.js 14

#112

Post by leerob »

BoorishBears wrote: post #106
cyral wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The part about including "use client" by default is referring to component libraries. e.g. you don't want to import and have it break because it uses useState. When writing your own components you can decide which need to be marked as client and which don't. I don't think NextJS is doing any harm by not magically including "use client" on your own files. I agree that it is confusing to be called "use client". Maybe "…

I pointed out that the directive is for libraries, and stated the framework React is built on reactivity . The vast majority of the ecosystem is built on using state. Didn't realize I needed to put this together for you, but that means the vast majority of the ecosystem defaults to breaking your build. _ And frankly, I really have to question your understanding of the topic when you say things like "NextJS is doing a…

> Next.js is still the only actual implementation of RSC

Here's one https://github.com/dai-shi/waku. Also, Redwood is "all in on Server Components" https://tom.preston-werner.com/2023/05/30/redwoods-next-epoc....

Re: Next.js 14

#113

Post by itsjustjordan »

joduplessis wrote: post #101
Scarbutt wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does vite/bun/deno has to do with keeping JS on the frontend?

They focus on the tooling and not pushing a "paradigm" like SRR. Maybe not the best examples I would admit.

That would be because their goal is tooling and not to be a framework? Bun is the worst example here cause it's literally now a runtime for Javascript! If rewriting all the Node APIs, directly executing TS files etc. isn't pushing a "paradigm" I don't know what is.

Re: Next.js 14

#114

Post by bentruyman »

boredtofears wrote: post #57
johnfn wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you stopped using a product because a junior engineer liked it? That doesn't strike me as the best rationale to make a decision.

So you start using a product just because other people tell you they are popular? That doesn't strike me as the best rationale to make a decision.

That's not the argument being made. Nobody said that.

Re: Next.js 14

#115

Post by leerob »

jowday wrote: post #86
leerob wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m sorry you haven’t had a good experience. And if you more specifics if anyone on the Next team replied to you in that way, please let me know. I’ll be the first to say the launch of the App Router could have been smoother. Definitely not the first time I’ve heard the feedback. I’m optimistic Next.js 14 is a step in the right direction based on this. What do you feel is undocumented? I’ll get that added.

Hard to say specifically, especially because I spent about a month trying to deal with this when we first migrated from Next 12 to 13 - but it essentially seemed that if you were using any web tech that wasn't built with SSR in mind, there were issues that were unaddressed in the documentation at the time. Someone else in these comments mentioned: - Fuck spending 3 hours working out why you’re not able to use relativ…

Extremely appreciate this detailed response.

Re: Next.js 14

#116

Post by ervine »

leerob wrote: post #110
ervine wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/22319 https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/46722 Let us take control when self-hosting, please!

Can you share a bit more about what you're trying to build? Is there a specific library you're wanting to have in Middleware versus putting it in a layout or page (which does support all of Node.js)?

Listen there are so many examples in that thread that this question is nothing but disingenuous. I'm sorry man.

Re: Next.js 14

#117

Post by 5Qn8mNbc2FNCiVV »

leerob wrote: post #110
ervine wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/22319 https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/46722 Let us take control when self-hosting, please!

Can you share a bit more about what you're trying to build? Is there a specific library you're wanting to have in Middleware versus putting it in a layout or page (which does support all of Node.js)?

Not trying to be offensive here and you're getting a lot of flak already, but these two issues are pretty self-explanatory...

It's a matter of configuration, it feels bad in the first one that a configuration is not possible if so desired and even worse having to jump through hoops in the second one because the edge runtime is enforced which one may not care about if all that's done for hosting is `next build` followed by `next start`

Re: Next.js 14

#118

Post by [deleted] »

5Qn8mNbc2FNCiVV wrote: post #117
leerob wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you share a bit more about what you're trying to build? Is there a specific library you're wanting to have in Middleware versus putting it in a layout or page (which does support all of Node.js)?

Not trying to be offensive here and you're getting a lot of flak already, but these two issues are pretty self-explanatory... It's a matter of configuration, it feels bad in the first one that a configuration is not possible if so desired and even worse having to jump through hoops in the second one because the edge runtime is enforced which one may not care about if all that's done for hosting is `next build` follow…

[deleted]

Re: Next.js 14

#119

Post by pcthrowaway »

garganzol wrote: post #69
jowday wrote: post #52

We've had an awful experience with Next. There are undocumented, broken things all over the place. Migrating to the App Router was a huge mistake. 'use client' didn't work as expected, and we had to install workarounds and try out different hacks to get access to the most pedestrian features we could expect from any other web framework. This is the broad consensus among everyone else I know using Next - they felt lik…

Where are people dissatisfied with Next migrating?

Astro probably, if they want to keep using React components.

Otherwise they might also be looking at Nuxt, Sveltekit or Solidstart, but if they're switching top-level frameworks they may as well use Astro because they can mix and match React/Vue/Svelte/Solid

Re: Next.js 14

#120

Post by boredtofears »

bentruyman wrote: post #114
boredtofears wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you start using a product just because other people tell you they are popular? That doesn't strike me as the best rationale to make a decision.

That's not the argument being made. Nobody said that.

Just like I never made the argument claimed either.
Post reply on HN