Live data from Hacker News

If not React, then what?

infrequently.org

1–10 of 756 posts

Re: If not React, then what?

#2
I read through this to hopefully save all of you the clickbait and mid-way through nonsensical philosophical diatribe. It's a bit ranty and devoid of technically-caloric content. The author is advocating for use of plain HTML/SSR patterns and avoiding SPAs and complicated frameworks/libraries ala Angular/React/etc. It's an old thought that lines up with the "you don't need JS" crowd.

Oh, and the author would like to kindly point out that React is legacy now. Because they said so. In case you didn't know.

Re: If not React, then what?

#5
post #2

I read through this to hopefully save all of you the clickbait and mid-way through nonsensical philosophical diatribe. It's a bit ranty and devoid of technically-caloric content. The author is advocating for use of plain HTML/SSR patterns and avoiding SPAs and complicated frameworks/libraries ala Angular/React/etc. It's an old thought that lines up with the "you don't need JS" crowd. Oh, and the author would like to…

Heartily concur. It's a classic of an essay written by one of those tortured souls who cannot understand why everyone so blithely moves past the incisive, obvious, truths they share.

With a topping of how this is all just solved by "giving a toss about the user", followed by a cloying apology for being vulgar

I'm not in web and am amenable to a good web dev hot take but this simply isn't worth the time, it's an array of generic wisdom delivered as if it's specific, written with the effort of someone who is proud of themselves when you disagree.

Re: If not React, then what?

#6
post #2

I read through this to hopefully save all of you the clickbait and mid-way through nonsensical philosophical diatribe. It's a bit ranty and devoid of technically-caloric content. The author is advocating for use of plain HTML/SSR patterns and avoiding SPAs and complicated frameworks/libraries ala Angular/React/etc. It's an old thought that lines up with the "you don't need JS" crowd. Oh, and the author would like to…

o7 thanks, people like this who do not work in contexts with problems that React solves yet insist React is not solving problems are profoundly boring.

Re: If not React, then what?

#7
WOW this is a long article! Still waiting for the substance though...

The only point I can agree with is that React is stupidly hard to learn. It feels like a tool made for aliens, though once you master it, it can be pretty efficient.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the JS-free web isn't coming back. And if you're using modern JS, you might as well use React (or a similar tool). The user won't be able to tell the difference.

Re: If not React, then what?

#8
> Frameworkism isn't delivering.

Correct. The reason is not the frameworks but the languages. What is needed is a much more high-level and feature-powerful language.

Just look at react. Passing down dependencies/values is a pain. So what did react do? It introduced contexts. Similar, other react addons try to solve this problem. But they all sacrifice type-safety in the process.

They simply cannot solve this problem; only a better language can. Typescript maybe could, but they restrict themselves to not generate code (or at least very limited, I think for enums they do it).

Without a change here, nothing can ever improve.

Re: If not React, then what?

#10

WOW this is a long article! Still waiting for the substance though... The only point I can agree with is that React is stupidly hard to learn. It feels like a tool made for aliens, though once you master it, it can be pretty efficient. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but the JS-free web isn't coming back. And if you're using modern JS, you might as well use React (or a similar tool). The user won't be able to tel…

What do you find hard to learn about react? I think a lot of tutorials are really bad, might be the problem.
Post reply on HN