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

Netflix Likes React

techblog.netflix.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 60 posts

Re: Netflix Likes React

#11

Post by mercer »

serve_yay wrote: post #9
16bytes wrote: post #8

This is very interesting to see since I value Netflix's opinion. What's been holding me back was the pervasive JSX design. I know the react guys say that JSX is optional, but react without JSX seems cumbersome compared to, say, ember with handlebars. It'd be interesting to hear from Netflix on the topic of JSX if they are going to grow their react codebase. That being said, isomorphic javascript and using the vdom ar…

If you think React seems interesting but JSX is a turn-off (or in my team's case a total non-starter), you might want to check out Ractive, http://www.ractivejs.org/ . It uses some of the same ideas like a virtual DOM. Here's a writeup by Ractive's developer where he compares it to React: http://blog.ractivejs.org/posts/whats-the-difference-between...

I've been using Ractive + Reflux for two decently-sized projects and I'm very happy with it. I'll probably make the jump to React for most future project because of developer mind-share and a bunch of other smaller reasons, but I can definitely recommend Ractive.

Re: Netflix Likes React

#12

Post by proksoup »

serve_yay wrote: post #9
16bytes wrote: post #8

This is very interesting to see since I value Netflix's opinion. What's been holding me back was the pervasive JSX design. I know the react guys say that JSX is optional, but react without JSX seems cumbersome compared to, say, ember with handlebars. It'd be interesting to hear from Netflix on the topic of JSX if they are going to grow their react codebase. That being said, isomorphic javascript and using the vdom ar…

If you think React seems interesting but JSX is a turn-off (or in my team's case a total non-starter), you might want to check out Ractive, http://www.ractivejs.org/ . It uses some of the same ideas like a virtual DOM. Here's a writeup by Ractive's developer where he compares it to React: http://blog.ractivejs.org/posts/whats-the-difference-between...

riotjs has a complete html based style also that is interesting in this same category I think.

Re: Netflix Likes React

#16

Post by svachalek »

kuni-toko-tachi wrote: post #13

People who chose AngularJS are looking more and more foolish everyday.

I wouldn't choose Angular for a new project right now because it's in no man's land: 1.x is dead, 2.x is not available, and there's no path between the two.

That said, Angular gets the job done. It scales better than people think it does (it's inefficient but modern browsers are just so fast it rarely matters) and it's a lot more complete than React. Angular is a full MVC framework while React is just about the V.

Re: Netflix Likes React

#17

Post by foxclaw »

svachalek wrote: post #16
kuni-toko-tachi wrote: post #13

People who chose AngularJS are looking more and more foolish everyday.

I wouldn't choose Angular for a new project right now because it's in no man's land: 1.x is dead, 2.x is not available, and there's no path between the two. That said, Angular gets the job done. It scales better than people think it does (it's inefficient but modern browsers are just so fast it rarely matters) and it's a lot more complete than React. Angular is a full MVC framework while React is just about the V.

> 1.x is dead

What does that even mean? It's very much alive and 1.4 is going to be released this year.

That's like the people who called Perl 5 dead because Perl 6 was announced back in 2000.

Re: Netflix Likes React

#18

Post by bobfunk »

svachalek wrote: post #16
kuni-toko-tachi wrote: post #13

People who chose AngularJS are looking more and more foolish everyday.

I wouldn't choose Angular for a new project right now because it's in no man's land: 1.x is dead, 2.x is not available, and there's no path between the two. That said, Angular gets the job done. It scales better than people think it does (it's inefficient but modern browsers are just so fast it rarely matters) and it's a lot more complete than React. Angular is a full MVC framework while React is just about the V.

Completely agree with this. You can be really productive with Angular and as long as you avoid the most common pitfalls its more than fast enough, and comes with batteries included and a rich eco-system.

The crazy roadmap to 2.x, and the decisions around 2.x in general just makes it a no-go for new projects at this time.

Re: Netflix Likes React

#20

Post by drawkbox »

svachalek wrote: post #16
kuni-toko-tachi wrote: post #13

People who chose AngularJS are looking more and more foolish everyday.

I wouldn't choose Angular for a new project right now because it's in no man's land: 1.x is dead, 2.x is not available, and there's no path between the two. That said, Angular gets the job done. It scales better than people think it does (it's inefficient but modern browsers are just so fast it rarely matters) and it's a lot more complete than React. Angular is a full MVC framework while React is just about the V.

React has a better chance because it is a micro framework or component or just the V like you mentioned.

Typical evolution of new tech is monolithic to micro, frameworks to components/modules/libraries.

In the end micro frameworks or libraries allow more flexibility to change over time.

Always bet on the micro frameworks and libraries, they can be swapped more easily and typically don't create blocks in overall architecture/design.

Post reply on HN