5 ms·

No thanks I'll stick with plain html and jquery for the frontend of my small projects. Plain javascript works perfectly fine as long as you namespace your funct

No thanks I'll stick with plain html and jquery for the frontend of my small projects. Plain javascript works perfectly fine as long as you namespace your functions and separate them into different files. All these frameworks end up creating much more problems than they solve.

robertfw 9y ago
> All these frameworks end up creating much more problems than they solve. For small projects, sure, they might. But working at larger scale falls apart using plain html and jquery.
- andr3w321 9y ago
  I assume by scale you mean many pages and not many visitors. For something like hackernews plain html and jquery would work perfectly fine.
  - mod 9y ago
    Yeah, I didn't mean scaling to users. Scale was a poor choice of words. Front-end complexity is a better metric, and in particular complexity which relies on manipulating state.
mod 9y ago
As someone who has worked on a truly large React project, I can assure you this is not true. I cannot imagine the shitshow that project would be using jQuery to track the state. Nearly as soon as you progress from 'backend rendering html' to single-page-app, it behooves you to use React.
- rocky1138 9y ago
  What's the major advantage of moving from "backend rendering html" to single-page-app?
  - mod 9y ago
    There are trade-offs. In very broad terms, single-page-apps are better for something that behaves more like an application (has a lot of user interaction or real-time behavior) than something that behaves more like a website (a page is loaded and the user views that now-static page for a period of time). I try to fit the more traditional paradigm when I'm allowed to architect an app myself. I like rendering a page on the backend. Anyway, you can read arguments by smarter people than myself: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/21862054/single-page-application-advantages-and-disadvantages http://stackoverflow.com/questions/21862054/single-page-appl... That's just one thread of many.
- flukus 9y ago
  > As someone who has worked on a truly large React project, I can assure you this is not true. Worked on or maintained an existing app for a number of years? There is a very big difference.
DiNovi 9y ago
for brochure websites, yes, For large projects, hell no.
castis 9y ago
Well thats great because you should always use tools that appropriate for the task.
mickael-kerjean 9y ago
> As someone who has worked on a truly large React project, I can assure you this is not true. there's no such things as the best approach for all needs. React brings you load of advantage but it assumes stuff you might not be ok with: - spend time maintaining your project over time fixing stuff on version change that won't bring any direct value to your project - you're ok with the licence and with the company maintaining it. - hard to debug stack trace - ship code that you have no control over, increasing the payload size (at least for small to medium size projects) > I cannot imagine the shitshow that project would be using jQuery to track the state. First nobody force you to use jquery. Manipulating the Dom isn't what it was when people had to maintain stuff on ie6. Dealing with the Dom directly isn't a "shit show" anymore and if you understand the concept of redux you can use those general concept and apply it in your project to manage the state. Plain Js simply assume the Dom isn't a magical piece of software, it just has prototype and stuff people usually don't like around here but hey, if you're coding stuff for the web, it's better to know how to deal with it than denying it Es6 brings lot of great features you can use today, you don't need react for that
- mlsarecmg 9y ago
  React is smaller than JQ and can go down to nothing with aliasing to react-lite, which strips off proptypes and other things. React and Redux is the easiest debugging has ever been. While its true that stateless crashing components can cause some headaches (will be addressed in Fiber), inspecting state and flow of actions, how something rendered or changed and why --- haven't had such a experience before with no other tool or language.
hyperdunc 9y ago
That's what I thought until I decided to use Vue for one of my smallish projects and subsequently realized the cognitive benefits are enormous. Now I'll only revert to plain old JS for VERY small projects where the mild overhead of a framework really doesn't make sense.
pier25 9y ago
Even for small projects libraries such as Vue or React are very useful. Of course it feels easier to stick with what you know, but managing the DOM with data is so much easier than using jQuery + Handlebars. Seriously, spend some time learning Vue. You won't regret it. It has to be said that you don't need any building process (Webpack, gulp, etc) to use Vue. You can simply write your templates in your index.html and import using <script>.
- _pmf_ 9y ago
  Just when I thought that we have enough JS frameworks and there's nothing to do fundamentally different, along came vue.js ...

robertfw 9y ago

> All these frameworks end up creating much more problems than they solve. For small projects, sure, they might. But working at larger scale falls apart using plain html and jquery.

andr3w321 9y ago
I assume by scale you mean many pages and not many visitors. For something like hackernews plain html and jquery would work perfectly fine.
- mod 9y ago
  Yeah, I didn't mean scaling to users. Scale was a poor choice of words. Front-end complexity is a better metric, and in particular complexity which relies on manipulating state.

mod 9y ago

As someone who has worked on a truly large React project, I can assure you this is not true. I cannot imagine the shitshow that project would be using jQuery to track the state. Nearly as soon as you progress from 'backend rendering html' to single-page-app, it behooves you to use React.

rocky1138 9y ago
What's the major advantage of moving from "backend rendering html" to single-page-app?
- mod 9y ago
  There are trade-offs. In very broad terms, single-page-apps are better for something that behaves more like an application (has a lot of user interaction or real-time behavior) than something that behaves more like a website (a page is loaded and the user views that now-static page for a period of time). I try to fit the more traditional paradigm when I'm allowed to architect an app myself. I like rendering a page on the backend. Anyway, you can read arguments by smarter people than myself: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/21862054/single-page-application-advantages-and-disadvantages http://stackoverflow.com/questions/21862054/single-page-appl... That's just one thread of many.
flukus 9y ago
> As someone who has worked on a truly large React project, I can assure you this is not true. Worked on or maintained an existing app for a number of years? There is a very big difference.

DiNovi 9y ago

for brochure websites, yes, For large projects, hell no.

castis 9y ago

Well thats great because you should always use tools that appropriate for the task.

mickael-kerjean 9y ago

> As someone who has worked on a truly large React project, I can assure you this is not true. there's no such things as the best approach for all needs. React brings you load of advantage but it assumes stuff you might not be ok with: - spend time maintaining your project over time fixing stuff on version change that won't bring any direct value to your project - you're ok with the licence and with the company maintaining it. - hard to debug stack trace - ship code that you have no control over, increasing the payload size (at least for small to medium size projects) > I cannot imagine the shitshow that project would be using jQuery to track the state. First nobody force you to use jquery. Manipulating the Dom isn't what it was when people had to maintain stuff on ie6. Dealing with the Dom directly isn't a "shit show" anymore and if you understand the concept of redux you can use those general concept and apply it in your project to manage the state. Plain Js simply assume the Dom isn't a magical piece of software, it just has prototype and stuff people usually don't like around here but hey, if you're coding stuff for the web, it's better to know how to deal with it than denying it Es6 brings lot of great features you can use today, you don't need react for that

mlsarecmg 9y ago
React is smaller than JQ and can go down to nothing with aliasing to react-lite, which strips off proptypes and other things. React and Redux is the easiest debugging has ever been. While its true that stateless crashing components can cause some headaches (will be addressed in Fiber), inspecting state and flow of actions, how something rendered or changed and why --- haven't had such a experience before with no other tool or language.

hyperdunc 9y ago

That's what I thought until I decided to use Vue for one of my smallish projects and subsequently realized the cognitive benefits are enormous. Now I'll only revert to plain old JS for VERY small projects where the mild overhead of a framework really doesn't make sense.

pier25 9y ago

Even for small projects libraries such as Vue or React are very useful. Of course it feels easier to stick with what you know, but managing the DOM with data is so much easier than using jQuery + Handlebars. Seriously, spend some time learning Vue. You won't regret it. It has to be said that you don't need any building process (Webpack, gulp, etc) to use Vue. You can simply write your templates in your index.html and import using <script>.

_pmf_ 9y ago
Just when I thought that we have enough JS frameworks and there's nothing to do fundamentally different, along came vue.js ...