Live data from Hacker News

Plain Vanilla Web

plainvanillaweb.com

31–40 of 715 posts

Re: Plain Vanilla Web

#31

I work for about 2k users, they do not give a shit about reactivity... build a monolith, make it comfy, embrace page refresh (nobody gives a fuck about that in the real world), and get shit done.

You can get smooth transitions with just css too with @view-transition https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/@view-trans...

Re: Plain Vanilla Web

#32

I work for about 2k users, they do not give a shit about reactivity... build a monolith, make it comfy, embrace page refresh (nobody gives a fuck about that in the real world), and get shit done.

I have seen more broken SPAs than MPAs, by far. Ironic, considering SPAs are supposed to improve conversion rates and user experience. Even from big companies with no excuse - Reddit is almost unusable on phones, X was straight up broken for a month straight with image loading on mobile. If you’re writing an SPA, and it isn’t Twitter or a content consumption platform, and it isn’t necessary to be API-driven, seriousl…

We created a generation of developers that AIM to over-engineer requirements... and we also came up with extremely pervasive frameworks to go with it... My firm cannot hire people with no React experience... people REALLY only know how to build cruft these days...

Re: Plain Vanilla Web

#33
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Data passing seems inherently broken in web components, because all HTML attrs must have string keys and values. Such a model just can't be built on top of.

Web Components can have properties too, and in fact this is the norm.

Can't put those in templates though. It's a serious pain and completely unnecessary.

Re: Plain Vanilla Web

#34

I support the general idea here but just because something is in a browser doesn't mean it's a good formalism. Notably, Web Components. They're fantastic for distributing components - after all, a Web Component will work in every framework (even React, the IE of frameworks, finally added support), or even in vanilla HTML. So you can build a component once and everybody can use it. It's fantastic. But for internally c…

I remember when web components first came out and there was some hype around them, and just being really confused on what they're actually good for. I think it's really telling that since web components came out there's never been a popular framework, website, or company that has heavily leveraged them.

Re: Plain Vanilla Web

#35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have seen more broken SPAs than MPAs, by far. Ironic, considering SPAs are supposed to improve conversion rates and user experience. Even from big companies with no excuse - Reddit is almost unusable on phones, X was straight up broken for a month straight with image loading on mobile. If you’re writing an SPA, and it isn’t Twitter or a content consumption platform, and it isn’t necessary to be API-driven, seriousl…

We created a generation of developers that AIM to over-engineer requirements... and we also came up with extremely pervasive frameworks to go with it... My firm cannot hire people with no React experience... people REALLY only know how to build cruft these days...

I have no React, Vue, or Angular experience. My websites were built with Livewire, some HTMX (basically Hotwire in the Rails world, server rendered HTML partials; or maybe Blazor SSR in the .NET world). I use Tailwind and a Laravel backend, but have some experience with C#.

If you think that’s interesting, send me your firm’s URL, I’ll consider applying. (Edit: or really anyone reading this who is interested - government of a foreign nation outside the US is not viable, unfortunately.)

Re: Plain Vanilla Web

#36
A solid overview with some great tips.

One recommendation is to change the mental model here. In my eyes it isn’t “don’t use a framework”, it’s “build the framework you need”. It’s tremendously easy to set up an extension of HTMLElement that has 90% of the functionality you’d want out of react. My SPA non.io is built like this - one master component that has class functions I want, and one script for generic functions.

Re: Plain Vanilla Web

#37

I support the general idea here but just because something is in a browser doesn't mean it's a good formalism. Notably, Web Components. They're fantastic for distributing components - after all, a Web Component will work in every framework (even React, the IE of frameworks, finally added support), or even in vanilla HTML. So you can build a component once and everybody can use it. It's fantastic. But for internally c…

I remember when web components first came out and there was some hype around them, and just being really confused on what they're actually good for. I think it's really telling that since web components came out there's never been a popular framework, website, or company that has heavily leveraged them.

What about Lit?

Re: Plain Vanilla Web

#38

Question - why would you do this in current year ? Is it that much more performant? I might be ignorant but frameworks seem to be the lingua franca for a reason - they make your life much easier to manage once set up!

Performance is irrelevant to 99% of web apps.

Cognitive burden is relevant to 100% of web apps.

When frameworks are used for that 99% of web apps for which they are overkill, performance actually drops.

> frameworks seem to be the lingua franca for a reason

Sure, but theres no evidence that the reason is what you think it is.

The reason could just be "legacy", ie. " this is the way we have always done it".

Re: Plain Vanilla Web

#39

I work for about 2k users, they do not give a shit about reactivity... build a monolith, make it comfy, embrace page refresh (nobody gives a fuck about that in the real world), and get shit done.

Also, it’s a mess separating stuff between react and the server, especially when building with express/node as the backend and the whole codebase together

It’s such a pain having clear separation in development where everything runs off of the react server by default, but then it won’t when deploying, so either you end up doing all sorts of weird stuff or you need to be building and running production locally constantly, thus defeating the whole convenience of having a dev server that can hot reload the changes

Re: Plain Vanilla Web

#40
post #18

Question - why would you do this in current year ? Is it that much more performant? I might be ignorant but frameworks seem to be the lingua franca for a reason - they make your life much easier to manage once set up!

It actually is kind of about performance. For me it's mostly about de-tooling your project. For example - I have a fairly complex app, at least for a side project, but so far I managed to keep everything without a single external dependecy nor any build tool. Now I have to convert it all to react and I'm not very happy about that, I will have to add a ton of tooling, and what's most important for me, I won't be able…

Why do you have to convert it to react?
Post reply on HN