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

If not React, then what?

infrequently.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 756 posts

Re: If not React, then what?

#11

Post by hu3 »

ganksalot wrote: post #6
4ntiq wrote: 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.

No need for personal attacks.

And there's also the other side: people who insist in overusing React. Perhaps that's what the author refers to.

I for one have see HTMX eat React for breakfast in a few of my clients during consulting.

Re: If not React, then what?

#12

Post by Aeolun »

The only part of this whole thing I agree with is that you shouldn’t start a new project in React. Switch to SolidJS, and gain all the benefits (aside from the huge ecosystem) but with a speed to match plain HTML/JS.

Re: If not React, then what?

#13

Post by klysm »

valenterry wrote: post #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;…

This is straight up not true. React state management is very flexible and requires you to think about what your problem is and the nature of state.

There is absolutely nothing preventing you from keeping those safety - I’m not sure what you mean by that.

The typescript type system is very advanced, maybe even too advanced! I disagree that more sophisticated languages are required.

Re: If not React, then what?

#14

Post by klysm »

adzm wrote: post #3

React is not even a framework, really. It is a great starting point for simpler sites. Honestly still one of the best solutions out there.

Completely agree. People regularly conflate react core libraries with stuff like next

Re: If not React, then what?

#15

Post by xcrunner529 »

dimgl wrote: post #4

> Frameworkism isn't delivering. It isn't? I find React to be great to work with.

Yes, you the developer. I think that’s his point. The performance if react sites is another thing and that’s what the user cares about. It also doesn’t work on mobile. React native was worshipped and now is thrown out.

Re: If not React, then what?

#16

Post by Spivak »

refulgentis wrote: post #5
4ntiq wrote: 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…

I mean the graph in the article of Amazon vs Target vs Wayfair is pretty damning. And honestly you don't even need the graph, just go to their sites. Target is dog slow while Amazon loads instantly.

Re: If not React, then what?

#17

Post by fastball »

Aeolun wrote: post #12

The only part of this whole thing I agree with is that you shouldn’t start a new project in React. Switch to SolidJS, and gain all the benefits (aside from the huge ecosystem) but with a speed to match plain HTML/JS.

> aside from the huge ecosystem

Re: If not React, then what?

#18

Post by synergy20 »

hu3 wrote: post #11
ganksalot wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No need for personal attacks. And there's also the other side: people who insist in overusing React. Perhaps that's what the author refers to. I for one have see HTMX eat React for breakfast in a few of my clients during consulting.

Really? HTMX for me brings spaghetti code on the server side. Fine for small projects but not so for large ones. I would prefer the clear separation between frontend and backend beyond small scale projects.

Re: If not React, then what?

#19

Post by xcrunner529 »

4ntiq wrote: 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…

You can read it that way if you ignore the rest of the article, I guess. They simply are saying many (most?) sites do not need to be SPAs and the baggage that entails with load times and latency. Follow a process to determine what is really needed based on objective requirements and then use objective measures to ensure it does not degrade the experience.

In most cases later frameworks are slow and bulky. I certainly hate using sites like X or Target on mobile. Random delayed loading of things, loss of scrolling position when going back, things just not loading the first time it delayed reactions. It sucks.

Re: If not React, then what?

#20

Post by quantadev »

The people who don't think React (or Vue) is important are the same ones who have never worked on a large project with lots of screen updates and state changes that absolutely cannot be avoided. React is still #1 in popularity, and the most crucial tool for almost any web developer (aside from using TypeScript, instead of plain JS which is also critical for large projects)

React is reported to be used by 39.5% of developers worldwide, while Vue.js is at 15.4%. The number of "apps" using just HTML+CSS is precisely zero, because those aren't "apps" they're documents.

Post reply on HN