3 ms·

I love the simplicity of StencilJS. Not sure why it's adoption is so low but those guys have put a lot of work. Much better than what Google is doing with Lit E

I love the simplicity of StencilJS. Not sure why it's adoption is so low but those guys have put a lot of work. Much better than what Google is doing with Lit Element.

marvindanig 6y ago
'cuz Facebook spent a bazillion dollars to push the developer community towards React? They are really good at––how should I say this––controlling the 'community direction and sentiments'. Even countries for that matter.
- dmitriid 6y ago
  Yup. Unlike the poor desolate folks at Google who ... checks note ... dominate the narrative on Web Components. And are, for example, consistently adopting a general aggressive anti-framework, and a specific extremely aggressive anti-React stance.
yesimahuman 6y ago
Thanks! I wouldn't say Stencil's option is low. It's being used in some pretty major apps today, like Apple Music, Amazon music, and powering the next version of AWS Amplify components. Not to mention powering every Ionic Framework component which is upwards of 15% of the app stores (not all use latest w/ WCs however). One downside to that is npm stats won't show dependency network effects with stencil because it is compiled out for component collections like framework.
- yesimahuman 6y ago
  Whoops, meant popularity, not option
hitekker 6y ago
Curious: how does Stencil compare to Lit Element?
- georges_gomes 6y ago
  The link should give you some answers on code style and performance. What else are you looking for?
postalrat 6y ago
I wouldn't consider Stencil simple. lit-html and lit element are simple, stencil is not.
JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
There are basic things StencilJS are missing, like source maps. Development has seemed to slow down on it as well. There's also no types for web components. So, you can't statically analyze your code and know you are indeed passing in the correct property types. There are wrappers for Stencil components for React/Angular/Vue, so you can ensure typings, but it goes to show the developer experience is far superior at the framework level.

I love the simplicity of StencilJS. Not sure why it's adoption is so low but those guys have put a lot of work. Much better than what Google is doing with Lit Element.

marvindanig 6y ago

'cuz Facebook spent a bazillion dollars to push the developer community towards React? They are really good at––how should I say this––controlling the 'community direction and sentiments'. Even countries for that matter.

dmitriid 6y ago
Yup. Unlike the poor desolate folks at Google who ... checks note ... dominate the narrative on Web Components. And are, for example, consistently adopting a general aggressive anti-framework, and a specific extremely aggressive anti-React stance.

yesimahuman 6y ago

Thanks! I wouldn't say Stencil's option is low. It's being used in some pretty major apps today, like Apple Music, Amazon music, and powering the next version of AWS Amplify components. Not to mention powering every Ionic Framework component which is upwards of 15% of the app stores (not all use latest w/ WCs however). One downside to that is npm stats won't show dependency network effects with stencil because it is compiled out for component collections like framework.

yesimahuman 6y ago
Whoops, meant popularity, not option

hitekker 6y ago

Curious: how does Stencil compare to Lit Element?

georges_gomes 6y ago
The link should give you some answers on code style and performance. What else are you looking for?

postalrat 6y ago

I wouldn't consider Stencil simple. lit-html and lit element are simple, stencil is not.

JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago

There are basic things StencilJS are missing, like source maps. Development has seemed to slow down on it as well. There's also no types for web components. So, you can't statically analyze your code and know you are indeed passing in the correct property types. There are wrappers for Stencil components for React/Angular/Vue, so you can ensure typings, but it goes to show the developer experience is far superior at the framework level.