4 ms·
> What's with the extremes? I'm not the one speaking in extremes. This is a quote: > The point is that it's faster and simpler to just have the server render
by nawgz 6y ago
> What's with the extremes?
I'm not the one speaking in extremes. This is a quote:
> The point is that it's faster and simpler to just have the server render the entire HTML and replace that
That's childish analysis.
- manigandham 6y agoYes, I said that in the context of this thread, specifically the GP post that said: > "a large html table rendered on the server into the DOM directly was orders of magnitude faster " Ignoring all context and calling this a "childish analysis" does nothing to further your arguments, and is yet another example of your comments going to the extremes. You show a dogmatic support of SPAs without any consideration for the repeated statements that they are overused and not fit for the majority of the interactivity that people use them for. If you refuse to accept this than there's nothing more to discuss.
- mattmanser 6y agoSeriously, you don't really seem to know what you're talking about. You can do it either way, and your particular example is a really poor reason to have a SPA. As multiple people are trying to tell you.
- nawgz 6y agoI don't know what I'm talking about, yet I build slick UIs for a living. Ok. You are advocating for every action to take a server round trip to render, a client UI that consists of some hobbled-together mess of client JS, endpoint-rendered HTML, and worst-of-all extra server infra in order to facilitate it, when your client presents you with a perfect execution environment for a single application to transform data into semantic UIs. I doubly enjoy that you didn't answer my earlier interpretation of your proposal, nor name any specifics of how you work, instead opting to swing back by once other people had sufficiently derailed the conversation.