4 ms·
It would be basically impossible for React to reach jQuery-like levels of adoption. The beauty of jQuery was that you could take an old, crufty pre-jQuery appli
by mkozlows 11y ago
It would be basically impossible for React to reach jQuery-like levels of adoption. The beauty of jQuery was that you could take an old, crufty pre-jQuery application, drop in a single script tag, and start writing nicer code immediately with no fuss (and refactoring old crufty code as you touched it).
You can't do that with React. I can't even imagine what it would take to migrate some 2010-era J2EE enterprise app to React, but it certainly wouldn't be just dropping in a script tag and writing your new code more cleanly.
Which means that React can only be the product of choice for new development moving forward; and even then, given how complex it is, only some subset of apps are going to bother with it. Nobody ever said "this application is too simple to bother with jQuery," because jQuery helped even simple apps, but there are legitimately huge classes of apps for which React is just massive overkill.
- gravity13 11y agoThe comments in here today are a bit out of touch. >You can't do that with React. You can. Other than React's rather hefty size, there's nothing stopping you. React is just a view layer, is unopinionated about how you get your data to it, and for rendering to a DOM needs nothing other than a DOM node to render into. Try it out. You can have 100 different React components slowly eating your legacy app alive. You just gotta be smart about it.
- frandroid 11y ago> You just gotta be smart about it. They said _no fuss_.
- rafaquintanilha 11y agoDrop a React component in the middle of a legacy project is IMO less fussy then jQuery code. I say that because components are standalone, so you won't mix logic for that piece.