3 ms·

I tried to use React.js but it felt like Java Swing all over again. While controlling state and triggering render when it changes seems like a novel idea quickl

I tried to use React.js but it felt like Java Swing all over again. While controlling state and triggering render when it changes seems like a novel idea quickly blows up in complexity. I find it odd that after 5 years developing multiple products with npm, node.js, meteor.js, flask + uwsgi, angularjs & react that now I'm back to just using Laravel + jQuery to build my single page application with REST api. It's easier and cheaper to find skilled php developers and learning jQuery is not a problem. It's the 2006 formula but it works so fucking well and so much easier. Scaling is going to take work regardless even on AWS so now I prefer reduced technical debt and maturity of tested and true technologies. I know this will get me crucified by mid 20 something hackathon hackers but this is just based on my own experience rather than blog articles. Something I learned very painfully through neophilism rampant in the industry.

EdwardMSmith 11y ago
Can you give some details about how things blow up in complexity? I've not built a complex app in React yet, so I'm looking for things to watch out for.
- jorgecurio 11y ago
  sure it starts with decoupling data describing the application state from DOM itself the way I understand it. So you write JSX which is a novel idea in itself and claims to 'bring html to js not like angularjs that brings js to html with annotations' but then you end up fiddling, chasing down which hierarchy of class that gets quite big over time. Unless you were in a large design agency it doesn't make sense to add the abstraction overhead for majority of today's single page apps can be pulled off with jquery libraries from unheap.com
  - dangoor 11y ago
    In a typical jQuery/Backbone kind of app, you've got some data in something like Backbone models and you've got state stored in the DOM. Keeping those two in sync bring complexity in. The React model is simpler (in the non-intertwined sense... see Simple Made Easy[1]) in that you have data in one place, a function that transforms the data to UI and the browser DOM is managed automatically from that. It's not perfect but it reduces complexity. [1]: http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy
codesculptor 11y ago
You are probably doing it wrong.
- jorgecurio 11y ago
  explain

EdwardMSmith 11y ago

Can you give some details about how things blow up in complexity? I've not built a complex app in React yet, so I'm looking for things to watch out for.

jorgecurio 11y ago
sure it starts with decoupling data describing the application state from DOM itself the way I understand it. So you write JSX which is a novel idea in itself and claims to 'bring html to js not like angularjs that brings js to html with annotations' but then you end up fiddling, chasing down which hierarchy of class that gets quite big over time. Unless you were in a large design agency it doesn't make sense to add the abstraction overhead for majority of today's single page apps can be pulled off with jquery libraries from unheap.com
- dangoor 11y ago
  In a typical jQuery/Backbone kind of app, you've got some data in something like Backbone models and you've got state stored in the DOM. Keeping those two in sync bring complexity in. The React model is simpler (in the non-intertwined sense... see Simple Made Easy[1]) in that you have data in one place, a function that transforms the data to UI and the browser DOM is managed automatically from that. It's not perfect but it reduces complexity. [1]: http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy

codesculptor 11y ago

You are probably doing it wrong.

jorgecurio 11y ago
explain