Not sure how this is any more natural than JSX/HTML. It looks much messier and harder to follow.
Also I’d like to see how they handle mount/unmount logic like event listeners.
VanJS (Vanilla JavaScript): smallest reactive UI framework
11–20 of 214 posts
Re: VanJS (Vanilla JavaScript): smallest reactive UI framework
#12I really don't want to be that guy, but... Vanilla JavaScript already exists as a popular term for JavaScript without any framework. No jQuery, no React - just JavaScript. Calling a library VanJS (as short for "Vanilla JavaScript") is just going to cause confusion. The repo's own description uses the phrase vanilla JavaScript in this way, and even mixes both meanings within a single sentence. If the author likes the…
[deleted]
Re: VanJS (Vanilla JavaScript): smallest reactive UI framework
#13I really don't want to be that guy, but... Vanilla JavaScript already exists as a popular term for JavaScript without any framework. No jQuery, no React - just JavaScript. Calling a library VanJS (as short for "Vanilla JavaScript") is just going to cause confusion. The repo's own description uses the phrase vanilla JavaScript in this way, and even mixes both meanings within a single sentence. If the author likes the…
That is why the name is only half vanilla: van ;-)
Re: VanJS (Vanilla JavaScript): smallest reactive UI framework
#14The "Hello World" example is a really good example of why React, Vue, etc are better than something more minimal like this library if you're optimizing for speed. The page will show nothing until the script runs, which requires downloading the VanJS lib and the script itself. You could inline them into the page, but that gets seriously messy at scale. A modern React app that's using some serverside rendering for the initial page load will send the user a page of HTML that can be streamed (rendered as it downloads) so it'll display pretty much instantly (if you're concerned about styles you could inline for the important stuff and defer for rest). The React "Hello World" will be a lot bigger but it'll display a lot faster on a slow connection, and it'll work if the user has JS disabled.
Obviously it's early days for VanJS and the authors could add all sorts of fancy SSR and clever scheduling, but if they do they'll lose the tiny size and end up making something that starts looking very like React (or more likely, Preact).
It's all a trade off. Sacrificing speed and complexity for size and DX is fine. You just need to be aware that's what you're doing, and neither is 'better' for all aspects of web app dev.
Re: VanJS (Vanilla JavaScript): smallest reactive UI framework
#15I really don't want to be that guy, but... Vanilla JavaScript already exists as a popular term for JavaScript without any framework. No jQuery, no React - just JavaScript. Calling a library VanJS (as short for "Vanilla JavaScript") is just going to cause confusion. The repo's own description uses the phrase vanilla JavaScript in this way, and even mixes both meanings within a single sentence. If the author likes the…
This. I originally thought this was a rebranding of http://vanilla-js.com/ and I'm disappointed.
Re: VanJS (Vanilla JavaScript): smallest reactive UI framework
#16Glad to see jsx-less approaches to declaring dom!
Very similar to: https://github.com/jehna/longwood
Re: VanJS (Vanilla JavaScript): smallest reactive UI framework
#17nice project, very cool, but I don't see the meaning to do this. nowadays, most small project can use vanilla javascript, if they don't need a framework, they really don't need it. if we are building a large project, why not use react/vue/svelte ? better docs, better features, better community.
> if they don't need a framework, they really don't need it.
I don't think it's an "all or nothing" situation. I do UIs without big frameworks, but that doesn't mean I don't use any library for some needs. I personally appreciate anything that needs no transpiling.
Re: VanJS (Vanilla JavaScript): smallest reactive UI framework
#18I really don't want to be that guy, but... Vanilla JavaScript already exists as a popular term for JavaScript without any framework. No jQuery, no React - just JavaScript. Calling a library VanJS (as short for "Vanilla JavaScript") is just going to cause confusion. The repo's own description uses the phrase vanilla JavaScript in this way, and even mixes both meanings within a single sentence. If the author likes the…
This. I originally thought this was a rebranding of http://vanilla-js.com/ and I'm disappointed.
what is interesting about that is when I saw solid.js performance chart, it is the closest to vanilla js in terms of performance.
Re: VanJS (Vanilla JavaScript): smallest reactive UI framework
#19I really don't want to be that guy, but... Vanilla JavaScript already exists as a popular term for JavaScript without any framework. No jQuery, no React - just JavaScript. Calling a library VanJS (as short for "Vanilla JavaScript") is just going to cause confusion. The repo's own description uses the phrase vanilla JavaScript in this way, and even mixes both meanings within a single sentence. If the author likes the…
Yes, please be that guy. Or I'll do it. Vanilla Javascript refers indeed to "javascript without a framework". So creating a framework and calling it "vanilla javascript" is... wrong?
A framework build not to be a framework, it's almost philosophical :)
https://plato.stanford.edu/Archives/Fall2012/entries/liar-pa...
Re: VanJS (Vanilla JavaScript): smallest reactive UI framework
#20The syntax is more like mithril.js, think would just stick with that or go with solidjs.