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

RawJS is a better way to call document.createElement()

squaresapp.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 135 posts

Re: RawJS is a better way to call document.createElement()

#31

Post by pcthrowaway »

jack_riminton wrote: post #2

Big claims and zero code examples? No I'm not going to go digging in a repo without so much as a top-level overview of the approach

Even worse, their "Check out Squares" link takes me to https://github.com/squaresapp/rawjs-sample

The live sample of that is not very impressive. And even worse:

> These are the limitations you need to accept with this project structure:

> You have to be disciplined to only use dependencies that are published on jsdelivr (npm install programmers need to clean up their act)

That with a package.json which has dependencies @squaresapp/rawjs and rawter, both of which have no info on npmjs. Talk about "do as I say, not as I do". The idea that you might be able to handle things like i18n and a18y without dependencies screams "not invented here" syndrome.

Re: RawJS is a better way to call document.createElement()

#32

Post by ncallaway »

jhardy54 wrote: post #18
8organicbits wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The demo is here. https://rawjssample.pages.dev/ I immediately see that it ~hijacks my back button~ fills my back-stack such that I can't use the back button normally. Doesn't look promising.

When you click links it changes the URL, so the back button takes you to the previous URL. I absolutely hate when pages hijack the back button, but this ain’t it.

I mean, it’s not a dark pattern hijacking the back button, it’s a bug hijacking the back button.

It’s still a bad experience, though.

Re: RawJS is a better way to call document.createElement()

#33

Post by ranting-moth »

synergy20 wrote: post #7

https://medium.com/@arannadelwar361/embracing-the-power-of-r... https://dev.to/paulgordon/after-using-rawjs-im-never-touchin... Both links helped to explain, the landing page is indeed not very good.

These are also marketing texts. The crowd at HN is very tech savvy. You could at very minimum implement the classic TODO app to show it off.

Re: RawJS is a better way to call document.createElement()

#37

Post by diggan »

Ah yes, "the frontend world reinvents everything".

VanillaJS has been a thing for a long time, and now these kids can come and think they can just rename the same idea and we won't catch them?! Pff, stealing framework ideas like that...

Besides that, all the code examples are not even written in JavaScript, why is the project called RawJS? Clearly should be called RawTS instead.

Re: RawJS is a better way to call document.createElement()

#39

Post by manojlds »

8organicbits wrote: post #10
jack_riminton wrote: post #2

Big claims and zero code examples? No I'm not going to go digging in a repo without so much as a top-level overview of the approach

The demo is here. https://rawjssample.pages.dev/ I immediately see that it ~hijacks my back button~ fills my back-stack such that I can't use the back button normally. Doesn't look promising.

Why is that bad? That's implementation detail and I would say the right implementation.

Re: RawJS is a better way to call document.createElement()

#40

Post by catapart »

I respect the intention here. I'm a big fan of "DOM as State", myself. I'm more partial to modularity and encapsulation using custom elements, rather than runtime js objects that inject well-known elements, but I can't say one is better than the other. Just my current naive preference.
Post reply on HN