4 ms·
Why didn't they "need" it? How do they decide what they "need"? This sounds like typical anti-change pushback, which I have learned can actually be a good thin
by Rapzid 9y ago
Why didn't they "need" it? How do they decide what they "need"?
This sounds like typical anti-change pushback, which I have learned can actually be a good thing. However, this anecdote is severely lacking in insight; much like most people's support of, or opposition to, change. Further, like the widespread belief that sentences shouldn't start with conjunctions; much less conjunctive adverbs.
- paulddraper 9y agoUm, maybe they didn't need client side rendering? Plain 'ol server-side HTML templating was faster and simpler? Not every web project needs react, or even JS.
- Rapzid 9y agoSure, maybe. But the post doesn't go into the details or even indicate the details existed. I'm not sure there is much insight here sans those details.
- disiplus 9y agoi recently saw multiple corporate sites implemented in angular 1. the job that should be plain simple html was done in angular, and you could notice it, simple flickering and slowdowns for no aparent benefit. just so stupid.
- eropple 9y agoAt this point, I'm not sure I agree. I am...not a fan of JavaScript, to put it mildly (though ES6 does a lot to suck less). But for my money, nothing out there is better at templating even static HTML than React and JSX. The compositional nature of components is way better than any other templating stack I've ever used and it's pretty easy to bake it into static HTML (Gatsby and `react-html-email` being awesome projects for it). I'm sure there are declarative, object-oriented (rather than text-oriented) templating engines out there that use an approach like React's. But I would consider using an imperative, text-oriented templating language a yellow, if not red, flag in 2017.
- paulddraper 9y agoI use Twirl, included in the Play Framework (Scala/Java). It is functional (well, as functional as React), and templates compile to plain 'ol functions, so compatibility and static typing is the same as the rest of the your program. Obviously, if I needed a SPA or something, it's not what I would use, but again, not everything should be an SPA.
- eropple 9y agoYou don't need to use React as a SPA, though, is what I'm saying. (When using React, those component trees, too, compile to 100% plain-ol'-functions.) Twirl is fine, insofar as it's attached to the Play (that's not to impugn you for picking it, my history with Play is colorful and frustrating). I wouldn't raise a flag for that. But not using something in this vein definitely is, and React is probably the most accessible way to do it for the 90-95% case of developers.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- rhizome 9y agoI don't know all the reasons they didn't "need" it, it was just a phone screen with their recruiter. The point was just that they only used a sprinkling of JS in general. And your semicolon is misplaced.