Live data from Hacker News

React is winning by default and slowing innovation

lorenstew.art

431–440 of 866 posts

Re: React is winning by default and slowing innovation

#431
React has a history of solid backwards compatibility. IMO one of the top reasons to choose React. You do not have to worry that much if the framework is still around in two years.

Also - as the article mentioned - everybody knows react.

This are two reasons why picking react is almost every time the right choice.

How the internal rendering works and if it is a little faster or slower is just an implementation detail.

Re: React is winning by default and slowing innovation

#432

React isn't winning by default. It's been so effective, so well designed that it's lived long enough to become the defacto standard... and the villian. Claiming React is slowing innovation is an absolutely bonkers take when React is essentially the only sane stable choice in a sea of "me too" frameworks and libraries with conflicting and confusing design choices.

How much innovation is needed. often iteration is better and cheaper.

Maybe my view is tainted by how Next.js implements/propagates it, but the last ~5 years of React has mostly seen iteration in the form of RSC (React Server Components), which in many projects manifests in chaos and creates a steeper learning curve.

I do think that React in its history has been able to evolve quite meaningfully, and in a good way (lifecycle methods -> hooks), but in the more recent years, less so.

Re: React is winning by default and slowing innovation

#433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

React was innovative when it just appeared 12 years ago. But a few years after there were already many other frameworks doing similar things. And since then it has been good enough, but not the leading innovative frontend framework anymore. React has rather matured in dealing with it's own outdated Virtual DOM design, making it much more boiler platy than modern alternatives.

What metric would you use to define the leading frontend framework, and what is it? I'm familiar enough with Angular, React, Flutter, Vue, and Svelte as big names in the ecosystem, but have really only done scrappy development with React and not much with the others. Google trends seems to show React is still a leader [1], and React has more than double the amount of Github stars than any of the others I've mentioned…

They said "leading innovative framework", and innovative is the key word. The biggest player is almost never innovating, they are usually performing some kind of undeserved market capture.

Re: React is winning by default and slowing innovation

#434

This is mostly just a complaint about how good React is. It's so good that it's difficult for the technical benefits of alternatives to outweigh the social benefits of choosing React. Note that this is neither a major compliment to React's technical merits nor a criticism of React's competitors. In fact, I don't even disagree with the author on some of his claims, such as: > React is no longer winning by technical me…

Never heard, "man react is great!" It's always, "we can hire more easily". Unfortunately

> "we can hire more easily".

Is this the synonym for cheaper workforce? You always get decent people if you pay enough.

Re: React is winning by default and slowing innovation

#435
post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should probably be making widget toolkits for the Canvas and using WebSockets for communication. DOM manipulation is a total hack-job. It's somewhat flexible, but the performance and dark-pattern cost is just too great. If you're making an interactive application, then treat it like an application and draw widgets to a canvas.

This is an insane take, show me a responsive button with hover state and a tooltip implemented in the canvas that outperforms a button rendered with React.

Figma?

Re: React is winning by default and slowing innovation

#436

Web components are the way out of this trap. Every single framework that isn't React should be wholeheartedly supporting web components to make sure that they have access to a viable ecosystem of components and utilities without having to bootstrap an entire competitor to React and it's ecosystem. While a lot of people view web components as competitors to frameworks, they don't really have to be. The just define an…

I'm wholly convinced that only people who have never tried to use web components for anything serious, and/or have basically no experience with web dev, are the only ones will make this argument. For example, a guy I know online who is an argumentative, boring backend dev that regularly has really bad and uninformed takes on things he has very limited experience with, he recently said he prefers web components. For a…

I think the same thing. In theory I would love to use the platform-native approach instead of a framework. In practice it’s an exercise in frustration.

About once a year I give web components another shot and rediscover all the things I hate about them. They are not designed for what web developers consider components and they are full of footguns and bizarre limitations.

Sometimes you will hear this subtly acknowledged as “web components excel at leaf nodes”. What this means in practice is that you shouldn’t use them for things that have contents. They are fine for their original use case, form elements where you don’t want page styles to affect things like the drop-down arrow in the control. But they are a massive disappointment for the typical use case.

Re: React is winning by default and slowing innovation

#437

React isn't winning by default. It's been so effective, so well designed that it's lived long enough to become the defacto standard... and the villian. Claiming React is slowing innovation is an absolutely bonkers take when React is essentially the only sane stable choice in a sea of "me too" frameworks and libraries with conflicting and confusing design choices.

I humbly disagree. I've never built a highly interactive application with React, only simple sites where the guys before me chose React, so I can't speak to its relative strengths or weaknesses there, but I've found that it doesn't scale down very well to simple sites. For a simple sign-in page, it's easy to just store state in the DOM and use a element to send the credentials, and maybe a little JS for the password…

Look, just because you're the most popular doesn't mean you're the best, did you fools not learn anything from high school? Look at Microsoft in the 90s-2000s -- terrible fucking software, but it was by far the most widely used.

Re: React is winning by default and slowing innovation

#438

React isn't winning by default. It's been so effective, so well designed that it's lived long enough to become the defacto standard... and the villian. Claiming React is slowing innovation is an absolutely bonkers take when React is essentially the only sane stable choice in a sea of "me too" frameworks and libraries with conflicting and confusing design choices.

Also react in particular in combination with tailwind seems to be easier for LLMs to generate. Probably due to the condensed syntax, no split between code, css and html, plus the color naming scheme of tailwind.

Re: React is winning by default and slowing innovation

#439
I'm not a front end dev and only use JS stuff time to time for small personal project. There is so much JS framework out there that appear and disappear so fast. I don't know if we can call it innovation. I have the impression they just reinvent the wheel with so little value added. I prefer to keep on React at least it will not disappear the next time I will do some change on my project.

Re: React is winning by default and slowing innovation

#440

Web components are the way out of this trap. Every single framework that isn't React should be wholeheartedly supporting web components to make sure that they have access to a viable ecosystem of components and utilities without having to bootstrap an entire competitor to React and it's ecosystem. While a lot of people view web components as competitors to frameworks, they don't really have to be. The just define an…

I worked on a business app made with lit web components and all properties being stringly typed was a real drag. It didn't compare to a realtime-first component library.

Alas, that’s a common misconception! You’re confusing properties with attributes. Attributes are set through HTML and are stringly typed, but litjs properties can be any js value.

For instance, I have a project with a small web component that displays data from a duckdb wasm connection. The connection object is passed as a property and it works flawlessly.

Post reply on HN