3 ms·
For a while there in the .5 to .8 days performance was pretty iffy, and the documentation was lacking (as was expected for a library pre-1.0), but it seemed tha
by Klathmon 10y ago
For a while there in the .5 to .8 days performance was pretty iffy, and the documentation was lacking (as was expected for a library pre-1.0), but it seemed that was when a lot of bloggers picked it up, compared it to react/angular, then dropped it.
And back then when I was trying it out there wasn't any easy way to integrate webpack (or something like it) which made it difficult as I've gotten very used to a good bundler/compiler.
- zacharytamas 10y agoYeah... I remember those days. The first projects I built with it were 0.5. The migration to 0.8 was... painful. But given the huge performance improvements it was worth it. As you said, you kinda just have to expect a little pain pre-1.0. But the time investment in learning and using it has been worth it in my opinion.
- caleblloyd 10y agoI've found it's still pretty difficult to integrate with Webpack because pretty much all of the components use bower instead of npm. I've been having success with https://github.com/aitoroses/vulcanize-loader https://github.com/aitoroses/vulcanize-loader although re-running vulcanize every time components change is not fast, and I can't get it to work with Hot Module Reloading. Maybe the Webpack story will get better with Polymer 2.0