3 ms·

> I recently quit my job to start a company. React + Redux, Go, Scala, Cassandra, micro-services, etc.. are all products made to solve Google and FB sized comp

> I recently quit my job to start a company. React + Redux, Go, Scala, Cassandra, micro-services, etc.. are all products made to solve Google and FB sized companies. If you are an one man band, starting your own little startup or project, stick to Python or Rails or PHP or Node, jQuery and Mongo. Your focus should be on getting something out there as soon as possible, not writing perfect software.

tracker1 10y ago
I wouldn't consider React + Redux particularly more difficult than an more typical MVC framework + webpage + jquery + one-off scripts. You can reach scaling (number of developers needed) issues very easily that way though.
- sfilargi 10y ago
  In my experience React + Redux translates to 10x boilerplate. Plus if you decide to go with React, probably means you are going for SPA, which again means a lot of work you get for free in your typical html + jquery app. I agree with you on the scaling argument, but the OP is a single developer starting a new project from what I gathered, so IMHO the last thing he should worry about is scaling.
  - tracker1 10y ago
    What work you get for free? You can reuse wrapper components... can even tether the route and the wrapper together, so it's easier to manage your route/component mapping... <Router ...> <DefaultPageLayout path="/" component={DefaultPage} /> ... So the templating benefits to html/jquery are a bit of a mixed bag, and if you're doing React + Node, you can start off with your fallback route being the app, and later add server-side rendering if in a time crunch. I will say the initial setup can be higher, if you don't like the structure of create-react-app, but most people new to react coming from a PHP and Angular background probably should stick closer to as it comes in the box. Wiring up redux is the biggest paradigm shift though... unidirectional workflows mean much better predictability in terms of state with far fewer bugs. Most of the times I see weird state issues in websites/apps lately they're angular 1 though.

tracker1 10y ago

I wouldn't consider React + Redux particularly more difficult than an more typical MVC framework + webpage + jquery + one-off scripts. You can reach scaling (number of developers needed) issues very easily that way though.

sfilargi 10y ago
In my experience React + Redux translates to 10x boilerplate. Plus if you decide to go with React, probably means you are going for SPA, which again means a lot of work you get for free in your typical html + jquery app. I agree with you on the scaling argument, but the OP is a single developer starting a new project from what I gathered, so IMHO the last thing he should worry about is scaling.
- tracker1 10y ago
  What work you get for free? You can reuse wrapper components... can even tether the route and the wrapper together, so it's easier to manage your route/component mapping... <Router ...> <DefaultPageLayout path="/" component={DefaultPage} /> ... So the templating benefits to html/jquery are a bit of a mixed bag, and if you're doing React + Node, you can start off with your fallback route being the app, and later add server-side rendering if in a time crunch. I will say the initial setup can be higher, if you don't like the structure of create-react-app, but most people new to react coming from a PHP and Angular background probably should stick closer to as it comes in the box. Wiring up redux is the biggest paradigm shift though... unidirectional workflows mean much better predictability in terms of state with far fewer bugs. Most of the times I see weird state issues in websites/apps lately they're angular 1 though.