Earlier quoted context omitted.
I made a graph showing download counts of those packages on npm - https://npmcharts.com/compare/carbon-react,material-ui,antd,... Obviously don't use that as a sole factor to determine what to go with, but with this many options, heuristics may be helpful to narrow down which ones to further investigate
material-ui is deprecated, try with @material-ui/core.
Evergreen: a React UI Framework built by Segment
271–280 of 309 posts
Re: Evergreen: a React UI Framework built by Segment
#272Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google is the exception that proves the rule.
How's your Silverlight app working out for you? Does it still connect to your WebObjects server?
I prefer WPF :-). Touche, but Google has more of a habit of killing off perfectly good stuff. But MS does it too. With Silverlight market forces, especially HTML5/mobile and Apple policies most likely killed it.
Re: Evergreen: a React UI Framework built by Segment
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
Check how many BUILD 2018 videos presentations were done in Chrome and how many were using Edge. As for actual market share, http://gs.statcounter.com/browser-market-share
Hm, maybe I missed the context somewhere along the lines. Are you talking about something on the developer side only? I thought the discussion was about something that works or not for the end user.
No, I mean the browsers that are part of accepting testing from project delivery contracts.
If it doesn't make the list, it is a nice to have only, in case someone on the team bothers with it.
Microsoft by using mostly Chrome at BUILD 2018 has given the sign to many businesses that it isn't worthwhile to list EDGE as a requirement.
Re: Evergreen: a React UI Framework built by Segment
#274Looks like they improved a ton with the v4.0 release. I used this just a few months ago and it was painful. Undocumented components, lack of basic customization, some bugs. Seems like that stuff has been addressed. I remember Evergreen adding about 60kB to my bundle size though (mostly due to its icons). I hope that's been reduced.
Re: Evergreen: a React UI Framework built by Segment
#275This list was posted a few weeks ago, but here is a fairly definitive list of similar UI frameworks: https://element.eleme.io/ https://ant.design/ https://quasar-framework.org/ https://at-ui.github.io/at-ui/ https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/fabric https://vmware.github.io/clarity/ http://appnexus.github.io/lucid/ https://ng-lightning.github.io/ng-lightning/ https://blueprintjs.com/ http://www.jetbrains.org/ring-…
Just clicked around and here's a note from the elastic/eui repo " WARNING While open source, the intended consumers of this repository are Elastic products. Read the FAQ for details." Doesn't instill confidence.
Hi. I maintain the library along with some others at Elastic. That warning is essentially us being good open source citizens and being very clear about how we maintain it. A lot of these other libraries are built specifically for their own products, no different then us. We just wanted to make it clear that the direction of the library and its maintenance is primarily driven by the needs of Elastic, rather than as some general community UI kit.
All that said, it certainly works fine as a general kit, and we build it with that practicality, it's just not something we officially support.
As far as stability, my team is pretty well resourced (and growing if there are any engineers interested!). We're using the library in many places around Elastic and its not going away anytime soon.
I've looked through most of the kits out there and they all have their pros and cons. Likely our biggest selling point is that it aims to be fully accessible and comes with a lot of fun charting libs. That puts its sweet spot for use in enterprise applications. It's also completely themable with about 8 lines of Sass variables.
Re: Evergreen: a React UI Framework built by Segment
#276Earlier quoted context omitted.
material-ui is deprecated, try with @material-ui/core.
Hot damn https://npmcharts.com/compare/carbon-react,antd,@blueprintjs...
Material-UI is by far the most complete of the frameworks in my opinion having used a bunch of them, and constantly updated. It's a joy to work with.
Re: Evergreen: a React UI Framework built by Segment
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is confusing. The only difference between if this were a web component vs a React component is that the consumer would not capitalize the name. Instead of ` ` they would do ` `. That's it.
Not at all true. Where's your onClick? People want their buttons to actually do things, right? With Web Components you're back in the land of saving element references, querySelector, addEventListener, and string-only attributes. It sucks. If you want something more like what React provides, where attributes (props) can be objects, functions, other React elements, etc. then you need to use a library (e.g. Polymer) th…
Nope, you're wrong. onClick works with web components just the same way as it does with any other element. Proof: https://codesandbox.io/s/j3jmkr98pw
Re: Evergreen: a React UI Framework built by Segment
#278Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just clicked around and here's a note from the elastic/eui repo " WARNING While open source, the intended consumers of this repository are Elastic products. Read the FAQ for details." Doesn't instill confidence.
Hi. I maintain the library along with some others at Elastic. That warning is essentially us being good open source citizens and being very clear about how we maintain it. A lot of these other libraries are built specifically for their own products, no different then us. We just wanted to make it clear that the direction of the library and its maintenance is primarily driven by the needs of Elastic, rather than as so…
Ace, thanks for elaborating. You could perhaps add a shorter version of this explanation to your README to make it clearer to others as well.
Re: Evergreen: a React UI Framework built by Segment
#279Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is confusing. The only difference between if this were a web component vs a React component is that the consumer would not capitalize the name. Instead of ` ` they would do ` `. That's it.
Not at all true. Where's your onClick? People want their buttons to actually do things, right? With Web Components you're back in the land of saving element references, querySelector, addEventListener, and string-only attributes. It sucks. If you want something more like what React provides, where attributes (props) can be objects, functions, other React elements, etc. then you need to use a library (e.g. Polymer) th…
Of course you can set props on a WC, it's just a DOM node. You can do everything you can do with any other standard node + exposed API. You could use jsx/vdom any other solution to set up props/events.
IMO saying 60kb of react+vdom code vs 6kb of templating library that builds on top of template literals is equally non-standard is not a fair comparison.
Re: Evergreen: a React UI Framework built by Segment
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
> As for Edge it is already in development, and to be honest it doesn't matter with its insignificant market share. Market shares are not the same across countries, clients or even industries. That's the first mistake you are making. If I develop a product, I target whatever browser my customers use, not some world wide statistic that has very little local significance. You just don't get to ignore what goes against…
Firefox on mobile does not count for the majority of companies. Mobile web is all about Safari and Chrome. Again you keep avoiding to explain what "many browsers" means.
According to netmarketshare[0], on desktop[1], Edge currently has 3.8% market share, more than Safari and Opera together. Combining mobile+desktop Edge has 2%.
Edge cannot be ignored if one is serious about any kind of business: that's 3-4 out of every 100 desktop users (existing or potential customers), or 'just' 2/100 if one includes mobile.
— Honestly, it seems that you are trolling. But I post the above stats in case you are not. But I also back it up with my own personal 'anecdata': I build business-to-business ecommerce, in our specific market our users are primarily (>95%) using desktop browsers, we have many thousands of existing business relationships, we cannot mandate which browsers they use — we draw the line at having the site simply work in all "modern browsers", which obviously includes Edge.
It doesn't really matter whether it's "many browsers" that don't support Web Components, or whether it's just one major browser. For many businesses, choosing WC is simply not a viable option for the foreseeable future.
[0] No affiliation, just googled it. [1] https://netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx