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

Removing User Interface Complexity, or Why React is Awesome

jlongster.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 228 posts

Re: Removing User Interface Complexity, or Why React is Awesome

#111

Post by cnp »

ben336 wrote: post #57
embwbam wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I have a word of caution. As someone else in the thread mentioned, React is very intuitive for beginners. There's another framework I've used that was also intuitive for beginners: Backbone. The reason why Backbone is inferior to Angular and Ember is because it optimized for the beginner. Angular and Ember are optimized for the experienced developer on a large code base. Specific to your suggestion, which I think…

Curious why you think Backbone is optimized for beginners as opposed to Angular. I get that Backbone and React have fewer concepts to learn and thus are more approachable. But if you're building serious applications I'd say Backbone and React require MORE experience, because there are fewer choices made for you than Angular (and especially Ember).

Totally agree here, but this too is a double edged sword.

Re: Removing User Interface Complexity, or Why React is Awesome

#112

Post by cnp »

outworlder wrote: post #52
jlongster wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heh, it's been mixed reactions. I will probably tweak the initial experience, but will need some time because I can't leave it open on load because it blocks the header.

I thought it was nifty. The shocking aspect might just be the big layout change. Perhaps a notification ("Check out the demo") so the user has to click it to enable the side pane, and then its business as usual.

I liked the layout as well. One thing I would change would be to make the code area wider than the demo area, as some of your lines wrap, where the demo area rarely needs a line break.

Re: Removing User Interface Complexity, or Why React is Awesome

#113

Post by mercer »

Zelphyr wrote: post #107
mercer wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never quite understand arguments like yours. As aquark pointed out, it's 'frameworks all the way down' anyways. Unless you're a one-of-a-kind master, you're always relying on multiple levels of abstraction. I don't know who pointed it out, but I find that a good rule of thumb is to master at least one layer of abstraction below the 'current' one. So in the case of React, you'd first make sure you are proficient wit…

Here's my experience with frameworks: They're really good at getting you to 80% completion really fast. The next 10% takes a little work but its doable. But that last 10%... its like pulling teeth. With tweezers. Covered in grease. That last 10% is the thing you need done to successfully deliver the project but which the framework designers didn't consider. In my experience you always run into that last 10%. The net…

Put that way, I fully agree. If I were to hire programmers for my company, I'd rather have a few like yourself than a bunch of Rails devs that don't really know Ruby nor Rails' internals (for example). And I've worked at a bunch of places where the effects of using frameworks without fully understanding them were readily apparent.

I took issue mostly with the blanket statement that frameworks are bad, because I think there's a lot of variety. Backbone, for example, is so basic that it might be useful for 'master' programmers, whereas Rails is a monster framework that is a bitch to handle if you get to that 10%. And I'd argue React, which is more of a library, could be a very useful abstraction that leaves you free to do things your own way, or even replace it eventually. But I might be wrong about that! I'm not a master...

Also, I guess in the context of the framework/library-explosion it makes sense that you'd point out the problems with a little less nuance :). And it's a good reminder for me as a young framework-raised, self-taught whipper-snapper to make sure I become a master at my 'craft'.

And not just because it pays better.

Re: Removing User Interface Complexity, or Why React is Awesome

#114

Post by nostrademons »

jlongster wrote: post #21
Flimm wrote: post #11

Please don't break the back button (Firefox and Chrome). In Firefox 29.0 on Ubuntu 14.04, the left sidebar with the text of the blog disappears and is replaced with a white space. I do not experience this on Chrome.

I just tried it on Firefox 26 on OSX and could not replicate. It has worked for everyone I've had test the page. The only thing that happens when you press back is the animation to load the right demo. There might be something buggy with how the CSS animation is using your graphics driver?

Back-button breaking here too. Chrome 31/Ubuntu 14.04. It adds history without changing the URL, as the sibling poster mentioned.

Re: Removing User Interface Complexity, or Why React is Awesome

#115

Post by kadhjasdkj »

Zelphyr wrote: post #107
mercer wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never quite understand arguments like yours. As aquark pointed out, it's 'frameworks all the way down' anyways. Unless you're a one-of-a-kind master, you're always relying on multiple levels of abstraction. I don't know who pointed it out, but I find that a good rule of thumb is to master at least one layer of abstraction below the 'current' one. So in the case of React, you'd first make sure you are proficient wit…

Here's my experience with frameworks: They're really good at getting you to 80% completion really fast. The next 10% takes a little work but its doable. But that last 10%... its like pulling teeth. With tweezers. Covered in grease. That last 10% is the thing you need done to successfully deliver the project but which the framework designers didn't consider. In my experience you always run into that last 10%. The net…

So if i may ask, what do you use?

Just raw DOM manipulations?

I feel like your argument is partially valid, but your argument also sounds like it effectively argues for pure Assembly. Anything ontop of that costs you a ton at the 10% mark. Now, i understand there's a difference between a Framework and a Language, but i hope you can understand my point.

I feel like you're going to one extreme, and arguing against another. Arguing opinionated frameworks with equal opinionated design seems odd to me.

Lastly, what are your thoughts on code maintenance? I feel like there is something to be said for "Get it done" thinking and "Make it maintainable", and sometimes they don't see eye-to-eye.

If it's cleanly written, with a framework that makes sense, isn't it far easier to maintain than raw JS? (Not specifically about React, just in general)

Disclaimer: I like React quite a bit. But i don't think you're "wrong", we just see things differently.

Re: Removing User Interface Complexity, or Why React is Awesome

#116

Post by cnp »

malvosenior wrote: post #55
ThomasDeutsch wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would love to support a JS project that is something like a port of OM to JS.

I understand that there are sometimes practical reasons for not being able to use ClojureScript, but have you given it a go? It's really very, very nice (much nicer than JS in pretty much every way). * Immutable data (you can get some of this in JS with Nolen's Mori http://swannodette.github.io/mori/ ) * Better functional programming than Underscore (map :mykey some-objects) * Great syntax: homoiconicity, thrush oper…

I've been trying to move towards ClojureScript for a while, but there are so few introductory resources out there that allow you to navigate between the Clojure world and the JavaScript world in a way that makes sense to people who come from JS backgrounds exclusively.

I wish OReileys would issue an expanded version of their Intro ClojureScript book!

Re: Removing User Interface Complexity, or Why React is Awesome

#117

Post by ulisesrmzroche »

jlongster wrote: post #65
ben336 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

URL doesn't appear to change in chrome, but the back button just cycles through the various demo screens after you've scrolled down for a while.

Oh, that's because the demos are loaded in an iframe. Not sure what the best solution is, but I'll think about it. Thanks.

Whoa there. An iFrame? Why?

Re: Removing User Interface Complexity, or Why React is Awesome

#118

Post by cnp »

iamwil wrote: post #41

Has anyone tried to use a different template engine with React? I was just wondering, since I didn't want to use JSX inline, and writing out html with React.DOM isn't appealing either. I just wanted a way to put templates in tags that get loaded by React Components. That way, I won't be mixing templates and the behavior of the components. Has anyone done this before?

There's this: https://github.com/mereskin/jsxify

But really, once you get used to keeping everything together it really does feel better. You just have to try it out.

Personally, since I use CoffeeScript, I like this lib:

https://github.com/atom/reactionary

which, since it strips out the required `null` or `{}` first parameter, feels very much like haml or jade.

Re: Removing User Interface Complexity, or Why React is Awesome

#119

Post by johnlbevan2 »

derwildemomo wrote: post #2

As a recommendation to the author, it would make sense to show the example/demo area the whole time, not only once I scroll down. It confused me. A lot.

Agreed 100%

Desired Reaction: Oh cool, a demo popped up just when it was needed.

My Reaction: Huh? Ugh, that's annoying. Wow, and I scroll back up and it moves again; I didn't ask for that either.

Re: Removing User Interface Complexity, or Why React is Awesome

#120

Post by ulisesrmzroche »

I'm honestly really, really wary of minimalistic front-end frameworks after two years of working on single page web apps.

All that ends up happening in practice is untested, messy code with deadlines up your ass and 0 developer ergonomics. Zero.

Post reply on HN