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

htmx 2.0.0-beta1

v2-0v2-0.htmx.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 88 posts

Re: htmx 2.0.0-beta1

#11

Post by ysleepy »

wqtz wrote: post #4

I am interested in learning about how something is being used and in what context, instead of what it has to offer. Can anyone tell me if they are using HTMX in a proven environment, like a user-facing environment? I think adopting HTMX as a framework would be difficult to switch from a React, Vue, etc. environment. I think using it inside internal tooling or a hobby project will not be able to justify its merit. I u…

The premise of migrating away from an SPA framework might make it seem weird, but I don't think that's the common adoption path.

There are a lot of server side templated web facing applications out there, and htmx provides a simple and gradual UX improvement with very litte investment.

It depends on what you deem "internal tooling" but a lot of b2b software isn't built to be flashy.

Re: htmx 2.0.0-beta1

#12

Post by stavros »

wqtz wrote: post #4

I am interested in learning about how something is being used and in what context, instead of what it has to offer. Can anyone tell me if they are using HTMX in a proven environment, like a user-facing environment? I think adopting HTMX as a framework would be difficult to switch from a React, Vue, etc. environment. I think using it inside internal tooling or a hobby project will not be able to justify its merit. I u…

I don't know if HTMX is an alternative to React/Vue/etc, it always struck me as an alternative to a purely HTML site, which I think 95% of web apps should be. I don't know what we get from avoiding full page loads that we don't then lose when we make sites janky and taking ages to load.

Re: htmx 2.0.0-beta1

#13

Post by jonathanberger »

mr90210 wrote: post #10
wqtz wrote: post #4

I am interested in learning about how something is being used and in what context, instead of what it has to offer. Can anyone tell me if they are using HTMX in a proven environment, like a user-facing environment? I think adopting HTMX as a framework would be difficult to switch from a React, Vue, etc. environment. I think using it inside internal tooling or a hobby project will not be able to justify its merit. I u…

For now I’ve decided to sit on React/Nextjs and actually focus on solving problems rather than playing the framework/UI library game that leads me nowhere. I totally get your sentiment.

By “sit on” do you mean “keep using” or “avoid”?

Re: htmx 2.0.0-beta1

#14

Post by mlhpdx »

wqtz wrote: post #4

I am interested in learning about how something is being used and in what context, instead of what it has to offer. Can anyone tell me if they are using HTMX in a proven environment, like a user-facing environment? I think adopting HTMX as a framework would be difficult to switch from a React, Vue, etc. environment. I think using it inside internal tooling or a hobby project will not be able to justify its merit. I u…

I’ve been using HTMX on a greenfield project (not reimplementing something) and I’ve found it easy to work with and effective. Nothing magical, but simpler. Less effort, not more.

After being reminded of the importance of supporting low-spec clients[1] I’ve been testing without the HTMX library loading as well, and mostly that works like it should. I say mostly because I didn’t get the markup right everywhere yet.

I can see why some wouldn’t like it. But, it’s not a good/bad or works/doesn’t thing - it’s just different.

[1] https://danluu.com/slow-device/

Edit: typo, HTML -> HTMX

Re: htmx 2.0.0-beta1

#15

Post by traceroute66 »

There's a lot to like about htmx, but one thing that does not sit well with me is its opinionated design decision that it will only render content if its sent with a 200 OK (tech TL;DR: shouldSwap defaults to false for non-200 response codes).

Most sane services will only return a 200 OK if, well, things went OK. Most sensibly designed services will return 400 range if an error has occurred that has been handled gracefully.

I am aware that you can kludge a hack in the form of a JS snippet to force htmx to render content on !=200, but it shouldn't be that way IMHO.

Re: htmx 2.0.0-beta1

#16

Post by sibit »

I'm not someone who usually gets excited by new major releases of frameworks/libraries but this one feels different. I got my start with CRUD PHP websites with jQuery. I've been using HTMX for the last year and it fills me with nostalgia while also allowing me to move faster when building UIs.

Re: htmx 2.0.0-beta1

#17

Post by danielvaughn »

traceroute66 wrote: post #15

There's a lot to like about htmx, but one thing that does not sit well with me is its opinionated design decision that it will only render content if its sent with a 200 OK (tech TL;DR: shouldSwap defaults to false for non-200 response codes). Most sane services will only return a 200 OK if, well, things went OK. Most sensibly designed services will return 400 range if an error has occurred that has been handled grac…

I didn’t know that, that’s interesting. I’d expect 100-199 responses to be able to render a result as well, at the very least.

Re: htmx 2.0.0-beta1

#18

Post by seanwilson »

Does general usage of HTMX require `unsafe-eval` in your Content Security Policy (CSP) to allow JavaScript eval? Or there's workarounds that still keep things simple?

Re: htmx 2.0.0-beta1

#19

Post by merpnderp »

wqtz wrote: post #4

I am interested in learning about how something is being used and in what context, instead of what it has to offer. Can anyone tell me if they are using HTMX in a proven environment, like a user-facing environment? I think adopting HTMX as a framework would be difficult to switch from a React, Vue, etc. environment. I think using it inside internal tooling or a hobby project will not be able to justify its merit. I u…

Isn’t this really just going back to the server side templating days and using jquery to load html snippets?

Re: htmx 2.0.0-beta1

#20

Post by PreInternet01 »

So, I absolutely love htmx, and this new version offers some incremental improvements that make things even better (unless you were using WebSockets or server-sent events, I guess, but the plug-in model doesn't look too bad?).

Unlike all-or-nothing approaches like React, htmx allows you to add just the right amount of partial updates to your web app, using just the technologies that were already there to begin with. I realize that this approach doesn't appeal to everyone, but being able to map simple requests to simple responses was an absolute life-saver for my projects many times over.

Migrating to a truly-truly minimalist approach (see: https://www.stefanjudis.com/notes/htmz-a-176-bytes-htmx-alte...) is still on my to-do list, but for now, I'm quite happy with the htmx status quo.

Post reply on HN