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.
Plain Vanilla Web
31–40 of 715 posts
Re: Plain Vanilla Web
#32I 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…
Re: Plain Vanilla Web
#33Earlier 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.
Re: Plain Vanilla Web
#34I 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…
Re: Plain Vanilla Web
#35Earlier 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...
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
#36One 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
#37I 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
#38Question - 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!
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
#39I 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.
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
#40Question - 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…