101–110 of 135 posts
What does it mean to be React-like? Is it a drop-in replacement? Are React components compatible? Or it just looks like React (it does)?
I'm going absolutely crazy trying to keep up-to-date with all frameworks coming out nowadays.
Yesterday it was Svelte, today it's Inferno.
What's good about using this instead of React? 3k of parsing instead of 40k is a huge improvement, but can we still using stuff that was made for React?
I'm lost.
Here we go again. I click the link. Get to an under construction page. Click the link, get to Github, think "this is interesting" to myself. Read on. Find there's a project called Cerebral, which is a state management library for React/Inferno/Whatever. Start thinking there's something wrong with my app, that's "just" about to launch, and is "just" using plain old Redux. And now I'm thinking it's not good enough any…
Sorry, can someone do a ELI5? What does it mean to be React-like? Is it a drop-in replacement? Are React components compatible? Or it just looks like React (it does)? I'm going absolutely crazy trying to keep up-to-date with all frameworks coming out nowadays. Yesterday it was Svelte, today it's Inferno. What's good about using this instead of React? 3k of parsing instead of 40k is a huge improvement, but can we stil…
I hope that helped – I'd recommend jumping on the Inferno Slack if you'd like to know/understand more: https://inferno-slack.herokuapp.com/
The team and I would love to hear from you. We want to make Inferno better and we believe in doing so, we can start a shift in the community that starts to realise that performance on mobile with the current state of libraries and tools is not good enough. This was always the primary goal for why I began Inferno – about 2 years ago.
There are many reasons why Web Components are important and framework proliferation is just one of them.
Don't forget there are many unpopular (wdsl) and dead (xhtml, e4x) standards out there already. There is absolutely no reason to believe that web components will have a better track record.
Relevant to this discussion, Web Components will make it possible for less mainstream frameworks to get a foothold in real applications by not being locked out by proprietary silos.
Here we go again. I click the link. Get to an under construction page. Click the link, get to Github, think "this is interesting" to myself. Read on. Find there's a project called Cerebral, which is a state management library for React/Inferno/Whatever. Start thinking there's something wrong with my app, that's "just" about to launch, and is "just" using plain old Redux. And now I'm thinking it's not good enough any…
This type of rhetoric really irritates me. Here we go again, someone wrote some code and released it on the internet for free! How could someone do this to you? Excuse the caps, I'm not trying to be hostile, but this attitude really makes me want to scream:
DON'T USE IT!
> And now I'm thinking it's not good enough any more
This is your mistake. The fact that someone released their code on the internet for free has absolutely no bearing on the engineering quality of your existing code. You're suffering from a case of programmer vanity, it has nothing to do with JavaScript, it has to do with the fact that you're looking for problems to solve with this shiny new tool instead of looking for tools to solve a specific problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you build something that'll make your customers happy? Then your stack is good enough.
I like this a lot. Your customers have no idea what a stack is, they, as well as the rest of the internet, just see the finished product. Thats what matters most.
Rewriting using another stack is N weeks/months that I'm not spending on writing, distribution, iterating on paid marketing, cold emails, calls with customers etc. I used tech that I knew I could scale into 1k users, likely more around 50k but we'll see. I've had zero technology based regrets aside for attempting to use Firebase for something that it wasn't suited for early on.
Just a note to people expecting an actual website – we are in the process of building one and you can see what it will look like here: https://twitter.com/trueadm/status/802675565421625344 Furthermore, if anyone has any questions feel free to ask away (I'm the author of Inferno). :)
Here we go again. I click the link. Get to an under construction page. Click the link, get to Github, think "this is interesting" to myself. Read on. Find there's a project called Cerebral, which is a state management library for React/Inferno/Whatever. Start thinking there's something wrong with my app, that's "just" about to launch, and is "just" using plain old Redux. And now I'm thinking it's not good enough any…
> Here we go again. This type of rhetoric really irritates me. Here we go again, someone wrote some code and released it on the internet for free! How could someone do this to you ? Excuse the caps, I'm not trying to be hostile, but this attitude really makes me want to scream: DON'T USE IT! > And now I'm thinking it's not good enough any more This is your mistake. The fact that someone released their code on the int…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Think of a professional vehicle driving. Be it race cars, trucks, etc... Sure, maybe in the early days those cars and trucks looked and worked way different from each other but over time the available ones largely overlap, work similarly, and work well in almost all situations. If every time a new car came out you had to spend several days/weeks trying to figure out how to drive it that would be incredibly annoying.…
The problem with your analogy is that, in it, we are the consumers, the people who buy the car. I would agree with some of your points if you were speaking from an end-user's point of view. But as developers, we're the engineers . We build the car . It is explicitly our job to do all the hard work of picking out the appropriate parts and assembling them in a way that provides a seamless experience for the end user. I…
> It's supposed to be hard, these are precisely the hard problems we are getting paid lots of money to solve.
And quite a lot of those problems - including this situation - are instances of the so-called accidental complexity. I.e. difficulties we inflict on ourselves, not parts of the problem that's being solved.
Anyway, the problem seems to be more profound in software than elsewhere, and I think it's because of the medium - code is very malleable; it's easier to rewrite a program than to redesign a car that's already being manufactured. So it makes it tempting to consider changing frameworks, instead of picking one that's good enough and sticking with it.