8 ms·
I thought that idiomatic react involved using JS render functions to turn JSX + Data into HTML; and using css-in-js to handle styles? I'm somewhat wary of Reac
by stepbeek 7y ago
I thought that idiomatic react involved using JS render functions to turn JSX + Data into HTML; and using css-in-js to handle styles?
I'm somewhat wary of React because I feel like it pushes developers to work with non-standard tools rather than the HTML + CSS + JS that browsers handle just fine.
I agree wholeheartedly on the ecosystem. I think global state stores will have a reckoning in the next 10 years where we collectively realize that maintaining a large amount of client-side state is not required for 90% of sites.
- lucideer 7y agoYou're right about idiomatic React + JSX; I was incredibly wary of React at first because of the apparent requirement of a JSX preprocessor, to the extent that I went out of my way to use non-JSX React. It was very easy—the ease of opting to do that gave me a bit of extra appreciation of the modularity of React (JSX is 100% a separate thing). That said, Typescript got me (maybe a little too) comfortable with having a preprocessor: I still use JSX-less React but in Typescript I've actually started using React-less JSX... CSS-in-JS is silly. I put that idea into the same bucket as a lot of other nonsense in the React ecosystem. Don't.
- npsomaratna 7y agoThanks for the explanation. I tried out React a while ago, didn't like the idea of JSX, then saw the complexity of the React ecosystem, and then decided "nope, too much complexity." I ended up using Vue, although from that I'm seeing, Vue is going down the "let's add complexity" route with Vue 3. I'll look at React again and reassess in this new light.