4 ms·

What are you going to do with your AJAX result without client side coding? I don't buy this argument at all. You could ditch AJAX and do everything server-side

by eloff 8y ago

What are you going to do with your AJAX result without client side coding? I don't buy this argument at all. You could ditch AJAX and do everything server-side like the old days (and it might even perform better given how heavy modern sites seem to be!)

TeMPOraL 8y ago
Shove them back into the DOM with little bit of JS? AJAX allows for some legitimate improvements if you need to work around the document model, but these days, it's abused to extreme levels.
- eloff 8y ago
  It's not that trivial, yeah you stick it back into the DOM somehow eventually. But you might not be getting back full HTML, you might need to modify it by adding some css classes, or event listeners. You might only be getting back data which you generate the DOM from. Basically you need a full programming language and DOM and events etc like we have now. But I fully agree that it's abused currently. Full disclosure I contribute to the madness by developing ReactJS applications.
  - mercer 8y ago
    I suspect Phoenix.LiveView will end up taking care of lots of the common use-cases with a relatively small client-side API, as much of the specifics would be handled on the server (including the code that gets triggered by an event). For the bits that really do need it, one would fall back on the 'regular' approach of writing client-side js. In my experience at least, a ton of the React work I do is quite similar within and across projects, and with many of the 'special bits' I'd be happy to resort to a more standard approach if it allows me to avoid React altogether (not that I hate React, I just love how much simpler everything would be if I can avoid it).
dreamcompiler 8y ago
AJAX requires client-side coding. I didn't say you didn't need client-side coding; I said you didn't need very much. AJAX (or the equivalent via websockets) is still necessary for partial page rendering and decent interactivity, which I think are still desirable features for the modern web. But of course for strictly static sites like most blogs you don't even need that.

by eloff 8y ago

TeMPOraL 8y ago

Shove them back into the DOM with little bit of JS? AJAX allows for some legitimate improvements if you need to work around the document model, but these days, it's abused to extreme levels.

eloff 8y ago
It's not that trivial, yeah you stick it back into the DOM somehow eventually. But you might not be getting back full HTML, you might need to modify it by adding some css classes, or event listeners. You might only be getting back data which you generate the DOM from. Basically you need a full programming language and DOM and events etc like we have now. But I fully agree that it's abused currently. Full disclosure I contribute to the madness by developing ReactJS applications.
- mercer 8y ago
  I suspect Phoenix.LiveView will end up taking care of lots of the common use-cases with a relatively small client-side API, as much of the specifics would be handled on the server (including the code that gets triggered by an event). For the bits that really do need it, one would fall back on the 'regular' approach of writing client-side js. In my experience at least, a ton of the React work I do is quite similar within and across projects, and with many of the 'special bits' I'd be happy to resort to a more standard approach if it allows me to avoid React altogether (not that I hate React, I just love how much simpler everything would be if I can avoid it).

dreamcompiler 8y ago

AJAX requires client-side coding. I didn't say you didn't need client-side coding; I said you didn't need very much. AJAX (or the equivalent via websockets) is still necessary for partial page rendering and decent interactivity, which I think are still desirable features for the modern web. But of course for strictly static sites like most blogs you don't even need that.