3 ms·

There are a lot of "configuration-free" Webpack solutions popping up. The one thing that they all have in common is optional configuration.

kn8 8y ago
Yes, but it's a solid foundation that they all try to offer. Raising the bar for what you get from the tool by default, ideally without making assumptions that would exclude it from any use cases. I'd argue one of the reasons Next.js is so popular is because you can get started with no configuration. It has optional configuration, but all the webpack config, css, hot reloading, route splitting, etc. all serves as a solid foundation.
kabes 8y ago
If you want something truly configuration-free you could try Meteor. It's mostly an advanced zero-configuration (not even optional) build tool these days that supports automatic code splitting via dynamic imports, full npm integration, multiple bundles (old/new browsers), ... Typescript support could be better, but I believe they're working on that. Of course being zero-config you loose some flexibility.
d357r0y3r 8y ago
The problem is, it's configuration free until it's not. If you end up having to pass in a partial Webpack config anyway, how much time are you really saying? The reality is, at this point, Webpack has become a powerful tool with a big ecosystem around it. Configuration is not that complicated. It used to be an absolute mess, but these days, the documentation is really good and there are many sensible defaults. It's worth learning without these wrapper solutions.
Vinnl 8y ago
Interestingly, the most common criticism of Create React App is that it doesn't allow configuration. I agree with you, though: it makes sense that they don't allow it. (Although they do have some sensible exceptions, as in: you can "configure" a CSS preprocessor like Sass by installing it.)

3 ms·

There are a lot of "configuration-free" Webpack solutions popping up. The one thing that they all have in common is optional configuration.

by porphyrogene 8y ago

kn8 8y ago
Yes, but it's a solid foundation that they all try to offer. Raising the bar for what you get from the tool by default, ideally without making assumptions that would exclude it from any use cases. I'd argue one of the reasons Next.js is so popular is because you can get started with no configuration. It has optional configuration, but all the webpack config, css, hot reloading, route splitting, etc. all serves as a solid foundation.
kabes 8y ago
If you want something truly configuration-free you could try Meteor. It's mostly an advanced zero-configuration (not even optional) build tool these days that supports automatic code splitting via dynamic imports, full npm integration, multiple bundles (old/new browsers), ... Typescript support could be better, but I believe they're working on that. Of course being zero-config you loose some flexibility.
d357r0y3r 8y ago
The problem is, it's configuration free until it's not. If you end up having to pass in a partial Webpack config anyway, how much time are you really saying? The reality is, at this point, Webpack has become a powerful tool with a big ecosystem around it. Configuration is not that complicated. It used to be an absolute mess, but these days, the documentation is really good and there are many sensible defaults. It's worth learning without these wrapper solutions.
Vinnl 8y ago
Interestingly, the most common criticism of Create React App is that it doesn't allow configuration. I agree with you, though: it makes sense that they don't allow it. (Although they do have some sensible exceptions, as in: you can "configure" a CSS preprocessor like Sass by installing it.)