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

The Overcomplexity of the Shadcn Radio Button

paulmakeswebsites.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 351 posts

Re: The Overcomplexity of the Shadcn Radio Button

#311

Post by icar »

simlevesque wrote: post #241
WA wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when all someone knows is React or other frameworks, things get overengineered The next level annoyance is that everybody just assumes React to be the default for everything. Check the Shadcn website. The landing page doesn’t mention that this is a React-only UI library at all. Same with Radix. The marketing sounds like a general-purpose UI lib. You gotta dig around a bit to realize that this is React-only.

For pure HTML pages I use Basecoat which is shadcn without React: https://basecoatui.com/

Thanks, I did not know this existed and I find it awesome. How was the experience using it? I wonder if it's well maintained or if it has any annoying quirks.

Re: The Overcomplexity of the Shadcn Radio Button

#312

Post by chris_engel »

LocalPCGuy wrote: post #223
Tade0 wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is so much ecosystem power in having high-quality, blessed implementations of things. Indeed. I work mainly in Angular because while it's widely regarded as terrible and slow to adapt, it's predictable in this regard. Also now with typed forms, signals and standalone components it's not half bad. I prefer Svelte, but when I need Boring Technology™, I have Angular. 90%+ of all web apps are just lists of stuff…

> widely regarded as terrible and slow to adapt I know you are saying you do work mainly in Angular, but for others reading this, I don't think this is giving modern Angular the credit it deserves. Maybe that was the case in the late 20-teens, but the Angular team has been killing it lately, IMO. There is a negative perception due to the echo chamber that is social media but meanwhile, Angular "just works" for enterp…

Strong disagree. Angular is cursed to the bone. It got a bit better recently but its still just making almost everything totally overcomplicated and bloated.

Re: The Overcomplexity of the Shadcn Radio Button

#313

Post by Dylan16807 »

rustystump wrote: post #309
Dylan16807 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except the correct way can be just as colorful, and it takes more effort to implement the bad way.

This is objectively not true, if it were the path of least resistance would mean everyone uses the option that is fastest and best. It takes far less effort to implement the bad way. I think people take their own skill for granted. Maybe you can but most others cannot. Maybe they will learn or maybe they are happy to put food on the table and go home at 5.

When I say "implement" I mean the big pile of code in the library. I do not believe making that entire custom mechanism was easier. There's so much to it.

Everyone else following along and merely using it I blame less, but they shouldn't have picked such a bloated library.

Re: The Overcomplexity of the Shadcn Radio Button

#314

Post by tomashubelbauer »

thedelanyo wrote: post #284
davely wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work on a React based web app in my Day Job and have genuinely enjoyed it. That said, it always feels like so much boilerplate to get up and running for a greenfield project (and things like NextJS or even TanStack Start add a lot of things that might be overkill for a simple web app). For some vibe coded side projects with Claude, I’ve been working with just using handlebars templates with Express and it has been…

> and have genuinely enjoyed it. People who haven't work with other frameworks like svelte, Vue - normally say they are enjoying React.

I've tried both and disliked both. Already before I did I was wary of patronizing-feeling statements like these, though. The Vue community in particular, or at least the vocal pockets of it I've come across online, seem like a web dev counterpart to the Rust evangelism strike force.

Re: The Overcomplexity of the Shadcn Radio Button

#315

Post by hu3 »

diordiderot wrote: post #242
hu3 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.mcmaster.com 2022 post about it. 1400 points. ~500 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32976978

I would recommend comparing to https://next-faster.vercel.app/ NextFaster feels faster than McMaster IMHO

Can't agree. That website is much simpler. Just a static list of images and text.

There's no complex, dynamic filter. And no special rendering per type of item.

It's a glorified tumbler since the only dynamic part looks like the shopping cart. Everything else is pre-rendered from what I saw in code.

For static content like that I would have used Astro which is the golden standard.

Re: The Overcomplexity of the Shadcn Radio Button

#316

Post by mrguyorama »

yalue wrote: post #189

15 years ago, Enterprise FizzBuzz [1] was supposed to be satire. These days, it's not quite complex enough to capture "modern" web dev. [1] https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...

Meanwhile the Java landscape that was lampooning got a lot better, and is pretty nice to work in and get shit done.

Re: The Overcomplexity of the Shadcn Radio Button

#317

Post by SahAssar »

shimman wrote: post #237
stavros wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't understand Tailwind. I heard great things about it, and then I tried it and it seemed like setting style="" on all elements, but with extra steps. Did we go off semantic CSS and returned to setting properties on each element, or was I using it wrong?

You aren't using it wrong, the only thing tailwind does better than 99% of devs is having default values that both look nice and mesh together well. Utility based CSS has been around as long as classes have, tailwind is just one iteration of that. GitHub use to have a utility css library as well before switching to their new design.

> having default values that both look nice and mesh together well.

So 99% of the value can be achieved with strict linting and autocomplete plugins.

Re: The Overcomplexity of the Shadcn Radio Button

#318

Post by Shakahs »

tmvnty wrote: post #153

So for a React developer who doesn't want to include Shadcn/Radix, but also doesn't have time to build every component/a11y/compat/edge cases from scratch, what are the better alternatives? Would be nice to list them here so developers can know a midpoint between DIY Shadcn/Radix

https://react-aria.adobe.com is the new Radix, it provides unstyled components with a heavy focus on accessibility and quality. https://github.com/heroui-inc/heroui is the new Shadcn.

Re: The Overcomplexity of the Shadcn Radio Button

#319

Post by antisol »

Kinrany wrote: post #228
Maxion wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Displaying the same thing on every monitor to the degree that monitor allows is well-defined. In this case the website will not appear the same on every browser. Most browsers have a zoom function that the user controls which is an accessability feature. This changes how the website renders on the page.

That falls under displaying things differently on purpose

you misspelled "asterisk"

Re: The Overcomplexity of the Shadcn Radio Button

#320

Post by shimman »

tmvnty wrote: post #153

So for a React developer who doesn't want to include Shadcn/Radix, but also doesn't have time to build every component/a11y/compat/edge cases from scratch, what are the better alternatives? Would be nice to list them here so developers can know a midpoint between DIY Shadcn/Radix

One thing to keep in mind regarding a11y, the semantic web is accessible by default. It's once you break away from establish norms do things become harder or tricky, but if you can stick to using actual semantic elements and not div-soup you will cover 90% of your use cases (assuming your use case isn't relying on just the canvas element).
Post reply on HN