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

Vue.js is Wikimedia Foundation's future JavaScript framework

lists.wikimedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 204 posts

Re: Vue.js is Wikimedia Foundation's future JavaScript framework

#81

Post by mickael-kerjean »

ng12 wrote: post #30
dzonga wrote: post #22

react is api stable, but not api stable if you know what I mean. with react, the ground is always shifting underneath you, which something like wikimedia probably don't have the resources to keep up with. even, as someone who has done react professionally, I can advise any small nimble teams, out there react ain't for ya. it don't love ya. however, for the big enterprisey apps, yeah react is good.

I cannot relate to this experience at all. Can you specify examples of what you're talking about?

not OP but 4 examples I've faced recently:

- facebook used to maintain CSSTransition for animation but dropped support for it and gave it to a dude who broke not only the public API but also some features I was relying on. I'm left having to recreate all the animation in a different lib, meh

- lifecycles related deprecation: componentWillMount, componentWillReceiveProps, componentWillUpdate. My app used to have a lot of these but that's the easy part to migrate, the problem comes when third party libraries use those and nobody support those anymore

- method deprecation which brake third party libraries: findDOMNode. The 2 one I've used that relied on it: dnd and csstransition. There's no clear path forward that would take less than a few days to migrate my code, meh

- upgrading webpack to whatever your config should look like in 2021 and what new plugin for x is named

Nothing very specific to react in particular but for simple use case jquery or plain javascript tends to create less problems to maintain things over longer period of time

As far as the community is concerned, hooks has been a positive change when used correctly but it's not because you can do something using hooks that you should, some of those abstraction are over-engineeringly absurd (eg: https://react-native-aria.geekyants.com/docs/useCheckbox#exa..., https://react-table.tanstack.com/docs/api/useExpanded, ...)

Re: Vue.js is Wikimedia Foundation's future JavaScript framework

#82

Post by porker »

pbalau wrote: post #79
zkldi wrote: post #51

I feel like I'm in an alien world when it comes to Vue - it has this weird pattern of making strings do loads of heavy lifting. The Github Commits[1] example on their documentation has a load of stuff that just doesn't sit right with me. Things like v-for="record in commits" to loop over something is insane to me - this isn't code, this is a string inside a html attribute! How can you get any sort of good type analys…

A long, long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, there was a thing called Coldfusion. And js peeps seem to want to reinvent it.

Many users - who weren't programmers by training - loved CF for the ease of understanding. They had a DX paradigm that worked and I understand why people try to emulate it. It's a question of audience, and not for the HN crowd.

Re: Vue.js is Wikimedia Foundation's future JavaScript framework

#83

Post by onion2k »

ricardobeat wrote: post #34
ggregoire wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although I understand what you saying about big shifts and kinda shared your opinion, specially about hooks, I started a new project from scratch last week and decided to give hooks a try (and, for reference, I've been using React on a daily basis for 5 years). Oh boy I was wrong. Hooks are way more easier and intuitive than what I thought. It makes code so much more readable and easier to reason about. Especially wh…

I've been through two large-scale projects now where we went 100% into hooks, and after a couple years the excitement has faded and I often wonder if it was worth it. It seems to end up making code even more complex than before, even though components look simpler on the surface. Not enough to go back to classes, but doesn't feel as good as those first steps. I absolutely hate the manual dependency tracking and havin…

... having every single thing be wrapped in a useX() method to avoid unnecessary updates

That is a bit annoying, but it's significantly less annoying than having a single huge componentShouldUpdate function that deals with everything a complicated component uses.

Hooks don't really change the work a component does. The logic is essentially the same. They just break it down in to smaller, more reusable, more declarative units. That's usually nicer to work with and a lot more "React-y".

Re: Vue.js is Wikimedia Foundation's future JavaScript framework

#84

Post by EugeneOZ »

zkldi wrote: post #63
Drew_ wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if you haven't had much experience with templating engines, but having the ability to write programmatic expressions to make a layout dynamic is a basic necessity that pretty much every known templating engine has. "It reads like storing code in a string and evalling it" sounds very funny in this context because that's exactly what every solution does and it works pretty well in practice.

My issue isn't the existance of programmatic expressions (yeah, it's the point of templating languages), but more that the way vue (and angular) do it is a mess of syntaxes that creates a really, really strange template. The lodash example is the main critique because that is not JS, but it involves evaluating JS - it's created its own programming language with its own rules -- when one was right there from the begin…

Angular doesn’t evaluate the code of the template. Example with lodash will not work out of the box in Angular.

Re: Vue.js is Wikimedia Foundation's future JavaScript framework

#85

Post by cdrini »

zkldi wrote: post #51

I feel like I'm in an alien world when it comes to Vue - it has this weird pattern of making strings do loads of heavy lifting. The Github Commits[1] example on their documentation has a load of stuff that just doesn't sit right with me. Things like v-for="record in commits" to loop over something is insane to me - this isn't code, this is a string inside a html attribute! How can you get any sort of good type analys…

Yeah, this isn't really an issue; it's just a templating language. You can get an extension for your IDE to make it syntax highlight correctly. That's like saying a .js file is just a string. Um, yes I guess sure? All code is just a string. HTML is also just a string. Vue's HTML templating syntax is also just a string, but it's also code. It's code that's mainly HTML, with certain spots that allow full JavaScript. And just like normal code, you can have compile time errors, syntax errors, runtime errors, etc.

Also as a side note: I'd say the best thing about Vue isn't it's templating system, but the fact that it's truly reactive. In react, only rendering is truly reactive. If you have reactive variables that depend on each other, then you have to manually mark those dependencies. Vue can deduce that dependency graph automatically, which makes coding much easier. It's like a giant spreadsheet.

Re: Vue.js is Wikimedia Foundation's future JavaScript framework

#86

Post by EugeneOZ »

zkldi wrote: post #73
sangnoir wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

would you have preferred {{ for item in items | orderBy 'field' -1 }} ? I feel like you're getting hung-up on the fact that the template directive is also a valid attribute and not something similar to jinja - but that's just syntax

I don't really see much of a difference - that is still storing it as a text attribute inside a DOM node. To be clear, I vastly prefer Reacts approach of putting HTML into JS, rather than Vue/Angulars approach of putting JS into HTML.

You are trying to discuss things you have never tried in practice, just saw some examples in the docs. Your opponents are trying to explain this fact politely.

Re: Vue.js is Wikimedia Foundation's future JavaScript framework

#87

Post by likeclockwork »

zkldi wrote: post #73
sangnoir wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

would you have preferred {{ for item in items | orderBy 'field' -1 }} ? I feel like you're getting hung-up on the fact that the template directive is also a valid attribute and not something similar to jinja - but that's just syntax

I don't really see much of a difference - that is still storing it as a text attribute inside a DOM node. To be clear, I vastly prefer Reacts approach of putting HTML into JS, rather than Vue/Angulars approach of putting JS into HTML.

It never ends up on a DOM node. The template is compiled into a render function.

Re: Vue.js is Wikimedia Foundation's future JavaScript framework

#88

Post by likeclockwork »

zkldi wrote: post #58
Exuma wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vue is brilliant when you actually use it. Nothing you've mentioned is remotely ever a problem in my experience. Also :href="xxx" isn't a string, that is javascript in there. You won't ever have more than 10 characters at most in an attribute, and if you do you make a method for it and call the method. The other alternative is JSX type stuff in react where you are injecting full JS into the templates which is like co…

> :href="xxx" isn't a string, that is javascript in there. This is the part I don't really follow, though. Technically: href here isn't a string, it's python, but it's stored as a string, representing python. In the :href example for JS, that's not JS - an engine isn't seeing that - that's a string that is evaluated as JS at some point in the vue lifecycle.

It's not stored anywhere. You seem to be upset that it's written with quotes around it. Are you aware that most computer programs are just text?

Re: Vue.js is Wikimedia Foundation's future JavaScript framework

#89

Post by EugeneOZ »

dzonga wrote: post #22

react is api stable, but not api stable if you know what I mean. with react, the ground is always shifting underneath you, which something like wikimedia probably don't have the resources to keep up with. even, as someone who has done react professionally, I can advise any small nimble teams, out there react ain't for ya. it don't love ya. however, for the big enterprisey apps, yeah react is good.

For the big enterprise apps “the ground is always shifting underneath you” is the worst nightmare that can be imagined. The only exception is if your corporation controls these shifts.

Re: Vue.js is Wikimedia Foundation's future JavaScript framework

#90

Post by barbarbar »

mdoms wrote: post #64
ng12 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I cannot relate to this experience at all. Can you specify examples of what you're talking about?

I'm not the guy you asked but I'm guessing he's referring to the "blessed way" of doing React, which seems to change every couple of years. Class components one year, pure components the next, functional components the next. A couple of years after that you're mad if you use React without Redux, the next year you'd be crazy to do Redux. State management a year later should be done with hooks, as should everything els…

This comment summarizes the fashion trends in a very elegant way.
Post reply on HN