4 ms·
I can vouch for Intercooler. We're rewriting large parts of our app (used to be a complex flux beast) and it is now way more maintainable and indeed around 1/10
by rlander 10y ago
I can vouch for Intercooler. We're rewriting large parts of our app (used to be a complex flux beast) and it is now way more maintainable and indeed around 1/10th the code. We now keep most of our app state within the server, instead of spread throughout client and server.
Of course, it is not end-all-be-all: it solves simple interface problems, those that should't require 200mb of JS dependencies to solve. Once the interface gets complex enough, you should use JS. We've still got a couple of JS components though.
- carsongross 10y agoHoly shit I can't tell you how happy that makes me to hear.
- ehnto 10y agoExcellent. Intercooler is simple enough that if it goes awry I will just write my own, but if I don't have to then great. But to further your point, intercooler is just a tool rather than an ideological shift in how we execute web applications. The reason I see the whole front end JS infrastructure mess as unintuitive is precisely because my needs are served with back end code and a sprinkle of Ajax. If I were building a complex SPA like an in browser photoshop, I might see more use in the complex ecosystem and try and tackle it. But, from a not-so-outside view it still looks like a mess.