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

Get in zoomer, we're saving React

acko.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 251 posts

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#61

Post by Joeri »

francislavoie wrote: post #30
crooked-v wrote: post #7

This post ultimately seems to spend a long time complaining about other people not putting in the effort to fix the problems of React... while the author doesn't offer any solutions or even ideas for solutions. Also, the author makes repeated digs at React 18's concurrent mode work while at the same time complaining about the kind of stuff concurrent mode is supposed to fix (for example, React updates not happening f…

> the kind of stuff concurrent mode is supposed to fix (for example, React updates not happening fast enough to keep up with mouse dragging). How does concurrent mode help with mouse dragging? I went reading through the React docs on this and they only really talk about data fetching patterns. I'm not sure I understand how it would apply to mouse events.

Doesn’t it help with having only high priority ui updates on the main ui thread with everything else happening in the background? To get low latency ui updates that’s exactly what you want: move everything except the low latency work to different threads.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#62

Post by nindalf »

technion wrote: post #56
friendlyHornet wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I stopped halfway through the article. Don’t talk down and condescend to your audience for no reason I think the article should be rewritten and all the ranting removed It’s also difficult to follow where the author‘s going with all the side rants and unrelated remarks And yes, that is considered ranting, contrary to what the author claims in the beginning of the article

I do agree with you, but to play devil's advocate: This article is currently #9 trending on the front page. I've meanwhile seen similar critiques of React written in a different style, and seen them not get a vote or comment. Perhaps those rants do serve a purpose?

Probably getting upvoted based on the catchy title alone.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#63

Post by cyber_kinetist »

Existenceblinks wrote: post #42
jeswin wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I honestly think after reading 50% of the article is all about bragging knowing history. This is why I can't read most tech articles these days. Won't get to the point without a long detour into the background of the problem; as someone in my forties, it's hard to justify the expense.

I kinda get him having to drag these historical UI to draw some points but ended up having no critical points for current context and title. I guess it's info for "Get in Zoomer" part but failed to demonstrate "We're Saving React". If a zoomer read that, what should they do, what's the point to get start here, and should they save React or start something new?

(As a zoomer,) I know that React is designed as the way it is because it's limited by the DOM model for all rendering and user interaction, whereas for native apps you have much more freedom in terms of design space of GUI toolkits (from a completely retained model like Qt to highly immediate ones like IMGUI).

The disappointment of the article is that he talks about how the Mac OS X apps were the pinnacle of desktop applications, but he never talks about how people have achieved this. Did the Cocoa API made some special design decisions (as opposed to MFC or Qt) that enabled devs to make more reactive apps?

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#64

Post by rkeene2 »

cowtools wrote: post #43
chris_armstrong wrote: post #39

This article is weird linking together many unrelated strands of thought. Like linking reactive programming to “reactive” UIs, when really they mean UIs that are forgiving to their users instead of breaking down. Or how by coding on the web we’ve lost the immediacy of a UI that runs on our desktop, and the primitives (like undo/redo stacks) that make desktop user interfaces friendlier, at least without having to buil…

As someone who has admittedly worked on approximately 0 user-facing programs, it seems like there are not many revolutionary ideas when it comes UI. I have some dream of a sort of user-interface system that exposes controls and data more directly to the user, independent of the author's stylistic choices. Sort of like semantic HTML with style-sheets that are configured on a per-user basis. It would be analogous to th…

Tk, and especially Themed Tk (Ttk) mostly fit this. It even has 3 geometry managers.

I've ported some code from Tk to run on the web (including working correctly in Lynx, as much as possible) [0], and the problem is still impedance mismatch. It's worse when running it on a phone, because you want a fundamentally different UI than you can easily describe. For example, Toplevels (aka windows) don't make any sense on Android or on the Web, but work well on the desktop.

[0] https://rkeene.org/projects/tkweb/

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#65

Post by b0afc375b5 »

mwcampbell wrote: post #44

> What's really frustrating about all this is how passive and helpless the current generation of web developers seem to be in all this. It's as if they've all been lulled into complacency by convenience. They seem afraid to carve out their own ambitious paths, and lack serious gusto for engineering. If there isn't a "friendly" bot spewing encouraging messages with plenty of emoji at every turn, they won't engage. > A…

I didn't read the article, but just based on the passages you have quoted and based on my recent experience, I will have to agree with the author.

I recently learned that GitHub has a discussions page which is separate from the issues pages. To pass the time and to give back to the community I try to help people and answer their questions.

It's a bit concerning to me that when I point some people to the right direction by making suggestions, linking to the docs, or linking to a relevant stackoverflow answer, they are unable to formulate an answer for their problem. Sometimes I literally have to create a reproduction repository so that they can see how the answer I gave can solve their problem.

I am not concluding anything here. But this has been my experience so far when engaging the community of an open source frontend framework.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#66

Post by _0w8t »

asddubs wrote: post #60
_0w8t wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a template needs loops or even conditionals, it is already too complex for my taste as it leads to wrong design patterns blurring presentation/code boundary. Something that just allows to access variables and call functions will keep the boundary while allowing a non-programmer or even the end-user to edit it.

disagree, because the alternative is having a million tiny templates, which is annoying and cumbersome. sometimes you just want a condition to check if a user has an avatar, or if there are replies to a post, or whatever else. same with loop, if something is specific to a template, there's no reason for repeating content to not be a loop (I don't think a template system should allow custom loops though, only looping…

If one wants a view for the whole page, then using a programming language with a good support for embedding strings will be a better solution as it avoids the need to learn one more language.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#67

Post by matheusmoreira »

nindalf wrote: post #62
technion wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do agree with you, but to play devil's advocate: This article is currently #9 trending on the front page. I've meanwhile seen similar critiques of React written in a different style, and seen them not get a vote or comment. Perhaps those rants do serve a purpose?

Probably getting upvoted based on the catchy title alone.

Can't wait for the "ok boomer" article refuting this rant.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#68

Post by asddubs »

_0w8t wrote: post #66
asddubs wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

disagree, because the alternative is having a million tiny templates, which is annoying and cumbersome. sometimes you just want a condition to check if a user has an avatar, or if there are replies to a post, or whatever else. same with loop, if something is specific to a template, there's no reason for repeating content to not be a loop (I don't think a template system should allow custom loops though, only looping…

If one wants a view for the whole page, then using a programming language with a good support for embedding strings will be a better solution as it avoids the need to learn one more language.

a simple template language is composed in its entirety of like 3 separate pieces of syntax, it should be something you can learn in 5 minutes. Like I said in my original post, the point of it is to limit what you can do, so that templates stay templates, and code stays code. If there's a learning curve to your template language, you've already lost.

The template system is somewhat like the type system in that it provides you guarantees. The templates cannot mutate any data or pull anything in that you didn't provide to it. You can be 100% sure that no one did a cute little temporary hack modifying the data inside the template somewhere, pulled in some external data real quick on a friday afternoon or did anything else that doesn't belong in the template. That's the advantage over just using a regular programming language.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#69

Post by Existenceblinks »

cyber_kinetist wrote: post #63
Existenceblinks wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I kinda get him having to drag these historical UI to draw some points but ended up having no critical points for current context and title. I guess it's info for "Get in Zoomer" part but failed to demonstrate "We're Saving React". If a zoomer read that, what should they do, what's the point to get start here, and should they save React or start something new?

(As a zoomer,) I know that React is designed as the way it is because it's limited by the DOM model for all rendering and user interaction, whereas for native apps you have much more freedom in terms of design space of GUI toolkits (from a completely retained model like Qt to highly immediate ones like IMGUI). The disappointment of the article is that he talks about how the Mac OS X apps were the pinnacle of desktop…

You know it well (DOM, Retained | Immediate). There's nothing to do with saving react here. Talking about browser app specially, I'd keep eye on standard like Template Instantiation and the coming up Symbol as Map's key. It's closed to the recent "Signal (reactivity)" trend. A way to update part of tree more efficiently without re-render-the-whole-thing. As long as we still use DOM, it's not going to be more revolutionary than this.

Re: Get in zoomer, we're saving React

#70

Post by mkl95 »

> Now, before you close this tab thinking "ugh, not another tech rant", let me first remind you that a post is not a rant simply because it makes you angry. Next, let me point out that I've been writing code for 32 years

Well I closed that tab.

Post reply on HN