9 ms·

We learned this hard way :P We avoid fancy tools as much as possible and use basics as much as possible. Laravel + Bootstrap + JQuery + MySQL works pretty wel

We learned this hard way :P We avoid fancy tools as much as possible and use basics as much as possible. Laravel + Bootstrap + JQuery + MySQL works pretty well then this modern stuff. Easy to implement, deploy and manage. P.S. Use knife which you really need. Try to use simple knife as much as possible.

maxhallinan 9y ago
> Laravel + Bootstrap + JQuery + MySQL works pretty well then this modern stuff. It's interesting to remember that Facebook started out as a PHP application. I imagine that Facebook's original tech stack closely resembled the stack you're recommending. And scaling that stack is what led to the creation of React. If you choose to build a rich user interface (like Facebook or Netflix) on top of that stack, you will likely find yourself creating abstractions to manage the complexity. Those abstractions will be equivalent in their utility to React, Ember, Angular, etc. I agree that a website does not always need or benefit from a React or an Ember. Small dynamic behaviors behaviors can be implemented with less powerful tools. But, the power of your abstractions will need to scale with the complexity of your UI behavior. That's why, at a certain point, the abstractions provided by React _are_ the right choice and jQuery is not. Regardless, the slide featured in this tweet does not comment on React working or not working well. As they say in a reply to that tweet, the application still loads React and renders React components. What they are presenting is an interesting optimization that has to do with the unique performance constraints of Netflix's UI.
- bigmanwalter 9y ago
  That's completely untrue. I've built both SPA and traditional fullstack applications similar to the mentioned architecture (although I prefer Python over PHP). Fullstack is a fraction of the complexity, with much more power. You can even use a simple library like PJAX to get all the same speed boosts an SPA offers without introducing any of the additional complexity. To be honest, I don't see what React offers beyond what you get with a templating language like Handlebars, and a few lines of jQuery for initializing components. This is, of course, for database heavy applications where each action requires the backend. If you're building a game, or an app that's mostly offline, SPA can be helpful.
  - davidpatrick 9y ago
    SPAs arent meant for solving the issue of offline apps and building games in web browsers. Their target was to address the difficulty of building, maintaining, extending an ever changing UI in a corporate development environment. Having worked on a ui in this setting, built with erb, jquery, and pjax... It is not about the degree of difficulty building it, but extending/modifying it, and collaborating with multiple crews in the same codebase. These are problems enough teams have experienced that they have moved away from the approach of jquery+handlebars. Now granted, SPAs have a bandwagon effect because of where the job opportunities are, so you get people using them not to solve those problems, but to align their technical skills with employable skills.
  - always_good 9y ago
    I have a hard time believing that you built a non-trivial SPA that you consider easy to maintain without an abstraction beyond jQuery. There's just inherent complexity in software, so it's like suggesting that you built an application without ever writing code outside of main() (functions are for hipsters).
    - bigmanwalter 9y ago
      I mean, you're welcome to have a look at it https://github.com/IEMLdev/Intlekt-editor https://github.com/IEMLdev/Intlekt-editor An example of how I put together a component is here https://github.com/IEMLdev/Intlekt-editor/blob/master/src/scripts/actors/glossary-panel.js https://github.com/IEMLdev/Intlekt-editor/blob/master/src/sc... - My "view" function takes a template string and replaces the node's content whenever "render" is triggered. - I create a "model" object which triggers a "render" event anytime it changes. You can also give the model object methods which act as Redux-style reducers. - The controller method is a shorthand for registering multiple jQuery events at once. That's pretty much all you need for a complex app. It's the entire React-Redux architecture à la jQuery + ES6.
      - always_good 9y ago
        That's quite a complicated, embedded framework. If that's "just jQuery", then React is "just ES6". I don't understand the distinction. Every abstraction is built on the layer below. You just rolled your own bespoke one instead of using one that already existed. > I don't see what React offers beyond what you get with a templating language like Handlebars, and a few lines of jQuery for initializing components. You say that like that's all your framework does, but I see more than that. Seems you're mistaking different trade-offs for objective improvements, something that almost rarely exists in software despite what you read in HN comments.
floatboth 9y ago
What do you use jQuery for in 2017? querySelector, classList, fetch, … — everything we used jQuery for in 2010 is built-in.

maxhallinan 9y ago

> Laravel + Bootstrap + JQuery + MySQL works pretty well then this modern stuff. It's interesting to remember that Facebook started out as a PHP application. I imagine that Facebook's original tech stack closely resembled the stack you're recommending. And scaling that stack is what led to the creation of React. If you choose to build a rich user interface (like Facebook or Netflix) on top of that stack, you will likely find yourself creating abstractions to manage the complexity. Those abstractions will be equivalent in their utility to React, Ember, Angular, etc. I agree that a website does not always need or benefit from a React or an Ember. Small dynamic behaviors behaviors can be implemented with less powerful tools. But, the power of your abstractions will need to scale with the complexity of your UI behavior. That's why, at a certain point, the abstractions provided by React _are_ the right choice and jQuery is not. Regardless, the slide featured in this tweet does not comment on React working or not working well. As they say in a reply to that tweet, the application still loads React and renders React components. What they are presenting is an interesting optimization that has to do with the unique performance constraints of Netflix's UI.

bigmanwalter 9y ago
That's completely untrue. I've built both SPA and traditional fullstack applications similar to the mentioned architecture (although I prefer Python over PHP). Fullstack is a fraction of the complexity, with much more power. You can even use a simple library like PJAX to get all the same speed boosts an SPA offers without introducing any of the additional complexity. To be honest, I don't see what React offers beyond what you get with a templating language like Handlebars, and a few lines of jQuery for initializing components. This is, of course, for database heavy applications where each action requires the backend. If you're building a game, or an app that's mostly offline, SPA can be helpful.
- davidpatrick 9y ago
  SPAs arent meant for solving the issue of offline apps and building games in web browsers. Their target was to address the difficulty of building, maintaining, extending an ever changing UI in a corporate development environment. Having worked on a ui in this setting, built with erb, jquery, and pjax... It is not about the degree of difficulty building it, but extending/modifying it, and collaborating with multiple crews in the same codebase. These are problems enough teams have experienced that they have moved away from the approach of jquery+handlebars. Now granted, SPAs have a bandwagon effect because of where the job opportunities are, so you get people using them not to solve those problems, but to align their technical skills with employable skills.
- always_good 9y ago
  I have a hard time believing that you built a non-trivial SPA that you consider easy to maintain without an abstraction beyond jQuery. There's just inherent complexity in software, so it's like suggesting that you built an application without ever writing code outside of main() (functions are for hipsters).
  - bigmanwalter 9y ago
    I mean, you're welcome to have a look at it https://github.com/IEMLdev/Intlekt-editor https://github.com/IEMLdev/Intlekt-editor An example of how I put together a component is here https://github.com/IEMLdev/Intlekt-editor/blob/master/src/scripts/actors/glossary-panel.js https://github.com/IEMLdev/Intlekt-editor/blob/master/src/sc... - My "view" function takes a template string and replaces the node's content whenever "render" is triggered. - I create a "model" object which triggers a "render" event anytime it changes. You can also give the model object methods which act as Redux-style reducers. - The controller method is a shorthand for registering multiple jQuery events at once. That's pretty much all you need for a complex app. It's the entire React-Redux architecture à la jQuery + ES6.
    - always_good 9y ago
      That's quite a complicated, embedded framework. If that's "just jQuery", then React is "just ES6". I don't understand the distinction. Every abstraction is built on the layer below. You just rolled your own bespoke one instead of using one that already existed. > I don't see what React offers beyond what you get with a templating language like Handlebars, and a few lines of jQuery for initializing components. You say that like that's all your framework does, but I see more than that. Seems you're mistaking different trade-offs for objective improvements, something that almost rarely exists in software despite what you read in HN comments.

floatboth 9y ago

What do you use jQuery for in 2017? querySelector, classList, fetch, … — everything we used jQuery for in 2010 is built-in.