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

htmx

htmx.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 291 posts

Re: htmx

#171

Post by owenpalmer »

oaiey wrote: post #162
throwaway2037 wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a great post. I'm not a web dev myself, but I have a couple on my team. I criminally underrated the challenge of maintaining a complex web app. It is madness: endless incompatible, forced upgrades. Real Question: Why does this ecosystem have this issue, but others have it less? For example: Why doesn't Python or Java have the same madness? Please don't read the question as criticizing web dev / JavaScript / e…

Because the originals parts where broken. I am speaking of 90s JavaScript, the DOM/Browser API and the not so much "batteries included". They could neither get fixed without a standard by committee approach of the browser vendors. So we started to compensate: end state: Typescript to fix JS, React/Angular/Svelte to fix DOM API and a npm package hell to have batteries included. And all of that bundles, compressed, etc…

Yes. When JavaScript is your only option, the only solution to JavaScript is... more JavaScript :(

Re: htmx

#172

Post by Hermitian909 »

SanderNL wrote: post #141
julianeon wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this comment is a bit out of date, especially if you’ve been watching JS from a distance for the past couple decades. This would’ve been true circa 2014. In 2023 it’s obsolete. There’s one framework that won, that’s all you have to learn, as far as the industry goes (as opposed to hobbyists) it’s been decided. React won. React is the framework you learn. “Popular frameworks for the past 6 years” - React has b…

That’s a bubble. You are in a bubble. React is dominant, sure, like the US is dominant, but it’s not The World.

The important part is that it's a bubble you can choose to live in. Companies everywhere use React and almost no one need ever choose to learn something else. As long as you know it you will be employable for another 20 years, just like with Java.

Re: htmx

#173

Post by fredrikholm »

zackify wrote: post #127
baby wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m pretty sure you can continue to use jquery and everything still works fine :D

I’m over here continuing to use react for 9+ years but every post on here acts like it’s changing every day.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pd8kWJVDQD4

Re: htmx

#174

Post by sroussey »

genmud wrote: post #52
chatmasta wrote: post #6

I continue to be impressed at the effort people will put into avoiding writing any JavaScript. Is it really easier to learn yet another DSL embedded in attribute tags rather than taking a day to setup your JS dev environment and then writing idiomatic code for running inside a web browser? Surely your htmx project will eventually cross a complexity threshold where you've added enough scaffolding that you may as well…

I might be going against the grain here, but the JS ecosystem is just a series of goalposts that are constantly moving and it has burned so many people over the years that folks just don’t want to deal with it. I’m fine learning JS, but with the ecosystem it isn’t just learning JS. It’s learning the new hotness for packaging / versioning, it’s the frameworks that are constantly in flux, it’s the inconsistent abstract…

> I might be going against the grain here, but the JS ecosystem is just a series of goalposts that are constantly moving

Welcome to real life.

Beware the ecosystem that does not change (COBOL).

Re: htmx

#175

Post by theK »

dmix wrote: post #159
number6 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you still use gulp or is it webpack nowadays?

Gulp is extremely out of date these days. Using webpack resulted in some of the most painful experiences of supporting serious production software in my career. The progress and maturity of JS tooling/DX as a result of stuff like esbuild and Vite, or Typescript more generally, can not he understated. For people not doing frontend it can seem like a neverending series of new stuff but there is a very rational and tang…

> Using webpack resulted in some of the most painful experiences of supporting serious production software in my career.

I never invested too much time in understanding webpack but it does feel like fighting it a lot of the time when I want to change something in my personal projects.

Care to share some anecdotes of those painful experiences?

Re: htmx

#176

Post by TekMol »

the_gipsy wrote: post #170
TekMol wrote: post #121

Hmmmm... no. This: Click Me Should be just this: Click Me This way, no magic would be needed, a lot of indirection and complexity would be avoided and everybody who knows HTML and JS could immediately read and understand it: - When does something happen here? When the button is clicked. - What does happen? htmx.post() is called.

You're missing the "swap".

It's always an interesting question how explicit one wants to get.

In this case, I would say the 'outerHTML' parameter is enough to define what will be done with the post result.

Re: htmx

#177

Post by justusw »

On the one hand I see the appeal of staying inside, say, Django the whole time and getting 3x done.

On the other hand I am so pampered by front end component based templating especially with Tailwind.

It would be cool if I could just import my Svelte components from Django.

Re: htmx

#178

Post by Uehreka »

hakfoo wrote: post #123
genmud wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might be going against the grain here, but the JS ecosystem is just a series of goalposts that are constantly moving and it has burned so many people over the years that folks just don’t want to deal with it. I’m fine learning JS, but with the ecosystem it isn’t just learning JS. It’s learning the new hotness for packaging / versioning, it’s the frameworks that are constantly in flux, it’s the inconsistent abstract…

What I hate is that you don't even write JavaScript anymore. You write fantasy future JavaScript. Sure, it will be available in ECMAScript 23, scheduled to drop in real browsers in 2092. But for now, here's a convoluted mess of polyfills, Babel, and WebPack, that we HOPE papers over the real behaviour of browsers, and suddenly your test-and-debug cycle has introduced a flow-shattering 15-second build cycle each time…

This is my problem with a lot of HN comments about JS: they read like they were written in 2014 (see also the “a new framework every week!” jokes)

ES2015 was the one big language update, and although it took a while to all roll out and for older browsers to die off, at this point we’re now living in “the future” and almost all language changes are incremental.

Like, you can write ES modules with async/await and run it in all modern browsers without any compilation. If you add an HTML import-map element you can even import node_modules by name.

Now, most people still prefer to use a bundler so that their users can load a single script instead of dozens of tiny ones, but that’s optional, and the gap between “the code you write” and “code that runs in the browser” hasn’t been this small in years.

Re: htmx

#180

Post by yscodes »

TekMol wrote: post #121

Hmmmm... no. This: Click Me Should be just this: Click Me This way, no magic would be needed, a lot of indirection and complexity would be avoided and everybody who knows HTML and JS could immediately read and understand it: - When does something happen here? When the button is clicked. - What does happen? htmx.post() is called.

I like your change. Much clearer.

Makes me more interested than the current syntax.

Post reply on HN