4 ms·
He praises React because it makes it easy to change the UI design at any time in response to new requests from the designers. The hard parts he talks about are
by tiglionabbit 11y ago
He praises React because it makes it easy to change the UI design at any time in response to new requests from the designers. The hard parts he talks about are animations, pre-loading, and virtual rendering, which require some higher level orchestration to get right in any framework. You have to have some component keeping track of this stuff. They mentioned that they had to extend the standard transition component to make it more reliable.
He also talks about writing code in a way that will work on both the server and client side, which is something you have to think about no matter what library you're using.
- et1337 11y ago> He praises React because it makes it easy to change the UI design at any time in response to new requests from the designers. Does it though? I suspect their system is fairly brittle after all that "higher level orchestration". I keep seeing this pattern repeat in different software disciplines. Unity is the same way: fantastic for prototyping, but often more painful in the long run. It reminds me of a wise saying (can't remember the source) to the effect of this: Javascript library user, day 1: "So expressive! So elegant! So easy!" Day 300: "Kill me now." C++ library user, day 1: "How can anyone live this way?" Day 300: "Whoever wrote this was actually pretty smart."
- tiglionabbit 11y agoThis conversation could be had about any abstraction. They help with some things and hinder other things. In this case, a purely functional transformation from application state to HTML means you don't have to think about every possible transition between states like you would in a normal jQuery application. However, since you are not thinking about transitions, implementing transition animations will be harder.