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

Tenets

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 162 posts

Re: Tenets

#101

Post by mpalmer »

baxtr wrote: post #97

Anyone know why these principales are called tenets? I believe it’s a concept that originates from amazon.

Tenet has a dictionary definition; as far as I can tell there's nothing to suggest that it's specific to some industry-speak concept.

If one is being super pedantic, tenets and principles aren't the same thing, but they're very close in meaning to each other.

The linked page contains examples of both tenets and principles, and uses the terms interchangeably in the title/intro.

Tenets are positions/beliefs/qualitative statements presented without proof. "The web matters", "No one cares" are examples from the OP.

Principles are related, but more like guidelines or instructions. "Optimise for vibes" is an example.

Re: Tenets

#102

Post by scotty79 »

codeflo wrote: post #75
spankalee wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> HTML is not the mother language - It's actually pretty terrible for describing dynamic user interfaces. I disagree a lot on HTML here - it's a pretty fantastic way of describing a render and layout tree, so much so that people are embedding HTML-like syntax in programming languages because the syntax is better than what the language already has to offer. To paraphrase something I've heard: JSX proves that HTML actu…

> JSX proves that HTML actually won. While I think that might be true, similarly, JSX proves that for the dynamic parts of the template, you want a real programming language.

I'd say that it's better to use real programming language, but you shouldn't use it in JSX beyond the simplest statements like ifs and loops.

Mixing any logic beyond that with HTML makes a mess of both.

I'm personally a fan of minimalist templating engines that provide only simple loops and conditionals so that template has to receive prepared data tree which is created by the actual programming language first and passed into the template.

Re: Tenets

#103

Post by iamcreasy »

rich_harris wrote: post #30

Ha, did not expect this to be on the front page of HN today! Some quick context: in January I was in London for a few days, and while I was there we had a Svelte Society London event. This document is a text version of a talk I gave there, which expands on some of these ideas: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eswNQiq4T2w&t=5211s It's deliberately brief and vague in parts, because it's designed to spur conversation. It…

Thank you for creating Svelte. I have basic web dev experience using no-framework. Is there any high level overview article explaining how Svelte compiler transpiles Svelte file into a series of html,css and javascript and wires them up together?

Re: Tenets

#104

Post by scotty79 »

ramesh31 wrote: post #16
nightski wrote: post #7

Now I know why I dislike Svelte so much, I don't believe in its principles. Which is perfectly fine, a framework can't please everyone. HTML is not the mother language - It's actually pretty terrible for describing dynamic user interfaces. This is why JS solutions are so appealing. If HTML is so magical why do they need a fancy template language? Magical, not magic - I really don't want it to feel magical either. I l…

>HTML is not the mother language - It's actually pretty terrible for describing dynamic user interfaces. Compared to... what? XML? QML? XIB? There's literally nothing better than HTML for UI. Anything else is either buried in a mountain of proprietary nonsense, is platform specific, or is far inferior technically.

HTML was designed to describe single A4 page of single column text.

The fact that people started building apps with is was miraculous persistence. HTML acquire some functionalities that supported such advanced things as multiple columns or fairly recently some automatic layouts not directly stemming from its text displaying roots. But in terms of flexibility and ease of use they are still behind layouts of Delphi from 20 years ago.

Re: Tenets

#105

Post by troupo »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #88
troupo wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was responding to this: "There's literally nothing better than HTML for UI." In general that is false statement. In particular, when it relates to browsers, HTML is the local minimum of what can be done to describe the "UI". Because HTML (well, DOM) is the only thing to describe the UI in the browser, and it's abhorrently awful. It can barely describe a page with static text and some images (and even then tools lik…

Even after all that, you still haven't made explicit the thing that needs to be explicit for any of this to make any sense: ".... for UI *IN A BROWSER*" I know it's convenient to forget the millions of us who spent years and continue to spend hours implementing UIs outside of a browser context, but it certainly doesn't feel very polite.

1. I've already answered about "in the browser"

2. Even in the browser it's the worst possible system

3. The original comment I was replying to didn't make any references to "in the browser", and explicitly talked about things like QML and XIB which are very much not in the browser.

Re: Tenets

#106

Post by troupo »

CharlesW wrote: post #96
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even after all that, you still haven't made explicit the thing that needs to be explicit for any of this to make any sense: ".... for UI *IN A BROWSER*" I know it's convenient to forget the millions of us who spent years and continue to spend hours implementing UIs outside of a browser context, but it certainly doesn't feel very polite.

I don't think anyone's trying to be impolite or diminish What Came Before, but HTML is used for lots more than websites and browsers. (Examples that come to mind are email, desktop and mobile apps, ebooks, and digital signage.)

Yes. Unfortunately we've not inly settled for one of the worst systems, but we additionally further settled for limited subsets of it as well (email, ebooks)

Re: Tenets

#107

Post by laurels-marts »

Svelte 5 moves closer to React in quite a few ways. The single component per file is still a dealbreaker for me. React got it right with composition and being able to break a component out into its sub-components.

Re: Tenets

#108

Post by zackify »

throwaway77384 wrote: post #29
rykuno wrote: post #25

The direction React/NextJS has taken modern web development is a modern day abomination. I say this as a passionate fullstack developer whos worked for YC startups and a fortune 10 company within the past decade. I appreciate Vercel as a company too; I have no hate towards them but the NextJS 13 release almost made me quit web development. Svelte is an absolute love language to the web and a direction for healing the…

So glad to see someone else say this. NextJS 13 was (is) a complete an utter disaster. I took on a reasonable-size project around that time and the documentation was incomplete, no library worked on it. Mystery caching and fetch-call deduplication all over the place. It was horrific. I wonder if things have improved since.

It’s still this bad

Re: Tenets

#109

Post by doctor_eval »

levmiseri wrote: post #51

As someone used to doing everything with vanilla JS and having troubles with getting deep into any web frameworks (especially React), Svelte has been a godsend. I'm in love with the philosophy and approach and its natural combination of JS/CSS/HTML is, in my personal bubble, second to none. Most recent experiment was https://meoweler.com , but I'm now trying more complex projects and can't sing high enough praises. I…

Meowler is really cool. Like, I don’t get it. But I love it.

Re: Tenets

#110

Post by tpict »

bowsamic wrote: post #56

Whenever I've tried Svelte I've honestly had a horrible experience, which surprises me somehow. It definitely failed on the "magical, not magic" thing. The exact workings of $ is still extremely confusing It's funny, a lot of the Svelte fans made me think that it would be very simple and nice, and that React was much clunkier, confusing, and implicit, but my experience was the total opposite

I feel insane whenever the Svelte reactivity thing is touted to me as an improvement over React state. Surely it’s not so hard to internalise JS equality rules that such a huge break from convention is necessary?

PS. I looked up the reactivity token docs on the Svelte website to make sure I was remembering correctly, but it repeatedly crashes the latest version of Safari on iOS. Oops!

Post reply on HN