3 ms·

I've used React full-time at work for a year and a half now, and I did a personal project in Vue for a while to try it out, before converting it to React. Ther

by _bxg1 8y ago

I've used React full-time at work for a year and a half now, and I did a personal project in Vue for a while to try it out, before converting it to React. There are some things I really, really hate about React. It is not kind or accommodating (Vue is both of these things), but it gives you control. I was head-over-heels for the first few days of using Vue; "breath of fresh air" is exactly the phrase I'd use. But the project I was using it for was an IDE of sorts, and eventually I just needed more control than it allowed for. If someone told me they were going to build a basic website - not a web app - with React instead of Vue, I would laugh at them. Vue truly is a successor to jQuery for the reactive age. But for really complex applications, it's too "magical" in my opinion.

k__ 8y ago
Vue reminded me so much of Ember that I could not understand how people could think of fresh air...
- sametmax 8y ago
  Embed is more complicated than vue to use. Vue has components. Updating the dom is mostly mutating your component attributes. That's it. Nothing else. With ember you got controllers, models, inheritances, many special methods... The VueJS documentation also makes it easier to get in. The Ember beginer tutorial starts with a full fledge app with a cli to install and use and features routing and addons O_o
  - k__ 8y ago
    The Vue components remind me very much of Ember components, that's what I wanted to say. All that templating and two-way-binding stuff. Sure, Vue goes a bit more in a lean direction, because it doesn't offer as much out of the box as Ember, but the idea behind the components seem to be similar. React or Angular (>2) have entirely different approaches, from one another and from Ember/Vue. They felt fresh to me.
  - _Tev 8y ago
    > Vue has components. Updating the dom is mostly mutating your component attributes. That's it. Nothing else. How long have it been since you at least looked at Ember? > With ember you got controllers, models, inheritances ... You use those now only when you choose to or not at all. > ... many special methods = adding features Vue does not have. > The Ember beginer tutorial starts with a full fledge app with a cli to install ... Ember-cli is something everyone is desperately trying to copy. Even Vue! Sorry, but this sounds like generic anti-JS-hate: tons of misinformation to bash something you have no clue about.
panoply 8y ago
I choose Mithril.js regardless of the apps complexity nowadays. I've built apps in React and Vue and do agree that Vue is the logical choice over React but I don't see it as ground breaking or magical. I see Vue for what it is, A JavaScript framework that gained popularity by being included by default in the Laravel framework and now has good financial backing. Mithril.js is a framework that is truly "magical" in my opinion. I mean its 8kb, includes routing and XHR Utilities out of the box. Faster render times than Angular, Vue and React. You can write HyperScript or JSX. The syntactic variants allow you to write your components as ES6 Classes or closures. Lifecycle methods, a render and mount option and the list goes on and on. People tend to dismiss Mithril because it's a lesser known framework but it has a vigorously thought through programmatic approach and you've got a direct line with the maintainers, you cannot match that. Sure, each to their own but calling Vue "Magical" is an incorrect assessment.
- aidenn0 8y ago
  I also use Mithril, and in my opinion, it's less "magical" than React in the sense that the GP is using[1]. When I ran into an issue using React, tracking it down was extremely difficult (by the end it was just "difficult" due to improved tooling around react). Mithril is small largely because of its simple implementation, which makes debugging a joy. 1: They seem to mean magical in the sense if "I'm never going to understand how it works"

by _bxg1 8y ago

k__ 8y ago

Vue reminded me so much of Ember that I could not understand how people could think of fresh air...

sametmax 8y ago
Embed is more complicated than vue to use. Vue has components. Updating the dom is mostly mutating your component attributes. That's it. Nothing else. With ember you got controllers, models, inheritances, many special methods... The VueJS documentation also makes it easier to get in. The Ember beginer tutorial starts with a full fledge app with a cli to install and use and features routing and addons O_o
- k__ 8y ago
  The Vue components remind me very much of Ember components, that's what I wanted to say. All that templating and two-way-binding stuff. Sure, Vue goes a bit more in a lean direction, because it doesn't offer as much out of the box as Ember, but the idea behind the components seem to be similar. React or Angular (>2) have entirely different approaches, from one another and from Ember/Vue. They felt fresh to me.
- _Tev 8y ago
  > Vue has components. Updating the dom is mostly mutating your component attributes. That's it. Nothing else. How long have it been since you at least looked at Ember? > With ember you got controllers, models, inheritances ... You use those now only when you choose to or not at all. > ... many special methods = adding features Vue does not have. > The Ember beginer tutorial starts with a full fledge app with a cli to install ... Ember-cli is something everyone is desperately trying to copy. Even Vue! Sorry, but this sounds like generic anti-JS-hate: tons of misinformation to bash something you have no clue about.

panoply 8y ago

I choose Mithril.js regardless of the apps complexity nowadays. I've built apps in React and Vue and do agree that Vue is the logical choice over React but I don't see it as ground breaking or magical. I see Vue for what it is, A JavaScript framework that gained popularity by being included by default in the Laravel framework and now has good financial backing. Mithril.js is a framework that is truly "magical" in my opinion. I mean its 8kb, includes routing and XHR Utilities out of the box. Faster render times than Angular, Vue and React. You can write HyperScript or JSX. The syntactic variants allow you to write your components as ES6 Classes or closures. Lifecycle methods, a render and mount option and the list goes on and on. People tend to dismiss Mithril because it's a lesser known framework but it has a vigorously thought through programmatic approach and you've got a direct line with the maintainers, you cannot match that. Sure, each to their own but calling Vue "Magical" is an incorrect assessment.

aidenn0 8y ago
I also use Mithril, and in my opinion, it's less "magical" than React in the sense that the GP is using[1]. When I ran into an issue using React, tracking it down was extremely difficult (by the end it was just "difficult" due to improved tooling around react). Mithril is small largely because of its simple implementation, which makes debugging a joy. 1: They seem to mean magical in the sense if "I'm never going to understand how it works"