5 ms·

So, this is a framework on top of a framework on top of a framework?

by weavie 5y ago

1_player 5y ago
Yes, also bugs on top of bugs on top of bugs. Given that I haven't had a great experience with Next.js and its bugs — a lot of them, and with the usual suggestion of "have you tried the alpha release to see if it has fixed your issue?" — I can only imagine how fun a framework of 3rd order can be when you encounter an issue. I'm probably just getting old. I see these frameworks by fresh faced frontend developers and I cringe imagining relying on them when you have looming deadlines and complex requirements. https://npm.anvaka.com/#/view/2d/blitz https://npm.anvaka.com/#/view/2d/blitz
- enahs-sf 5y ago
  Whenever the details are swept under the rug, I feel uneasy. Maybe it’s a need for control, but I feel like not understanding the configuration is not doing yourself any favors when it comes time to debug.
  - flybayer 5y ago
    The magic is very minimal and easily inspectable via the network tab of browser dev tools. We essentially just provide a transparent pipe between client and server. Whatever you return from the function on the server is exactly what comes out on the client. We don't interfere with that. All we do is handle all the HTTP stuff for you. Some have expressed the same concern, but after using it they’ve had zero issues.
- leerob 5y ago
  I'm sorry about the poor experience with Next.js. Are there any issues in particular I can look into? We frequently cut canary releases to get bug fixes out, so that might have been the suggestion from the team. Regardless, happy to take a look.
- tluyben2 5y ago
  I am old and I cringe when I see most of the 'modern stuff'. It is just simply a minefield and dangerous to use. I work in banking and have to sign off on everything used for decades in the future potentially: not much of what is in these frameworks on frameworks on bugs on frameworks qualifies even basic scrutiny but devs do want to use them because they read on hn/reddit it is the new thing. Painful struggle Edit: I do not mean to say people should stop making new things or trying to improve upon older ideas; just saying most this stuff needs huge ALPHA/experimental stamps on it.
  - lstamour 5y ago
    It's partly a reflection of the web and web browsers. Yes, the goal is "don't break the web," but with each new release the odds that a website from "decades in the past" will continue to work today are slim. I don't mean that a simple HTML page won't work, but rather that HTML and other web standards are living - and compatibility often breaks when it's noticed that public web pages don't use features (low adoption) or when features are removed for security or privacy reasons. When you get used to re-learning everything on a monthly basis, it's easy to adopt new approaches. In fact, the Web Components movement, including lit-element, is basically built on the idea that you should write code for the browser, and thus your codebase must evolve as the browser does. If you look at it from the perspective of "this code must work forever," well, I'm not sure the browser is the right place to be. Have you considered shipping an old and outdated copy of a browser, such as Electron? ;-) Edit: That said, I do agree there's a lot of reinvent-the-wheel in NPM-land, but I don't think the best possible wheel has been invented yet, so I appreciate having options. TypeScript is a great example: they're continuing to rapidly evolve the language with each point release yet they also centrally maintain DefinitelyTyped to be backwards compatible to previous releases. This means maintainers don't have to manually update their types for each point-release of TypeScript. If you look for that, you'll see a lot of "automatic backwards compatibility" in places. JS Codemods for example, can automatically update minor and sometimes major versions of React. Not everything is pre-1.0 and experimental, but the new stuff is definitely shinier.
    - mekkkkkk 5y ago
pssdbt 5y ago
Framework on top of a framework using a UI library, but close enough.
flybayer 5y ago
Yep, nothing new. It’s abstractions all the way down :)

So, this is a framework on top of a framework on top of a framework?

by weavie 5y ago

So, this is a framework on top of a framework on top of a framework?

Yes, also bugs on top of bugs on top of bugs. Given that I haven't had a great experience with Next.js and its bugs — a lot of them, and with the usual suggestion of "have you tried the alpha release to see if it has fixed your issue?" — I can only imagine how fun a framework of 3rd order can be when you encounter an issue. I'm probably just getting old. I see these frameworks by fresh faced frontend developers and I cringe imagining relying on them when you have looming deadlines and complex requirements. https://npm.anvaka.com/#/view/2d/blitz https://npm.anvaka.com/#/view/2d/blitz

enahs-sf 5y ago
Whenever the details are swept under the rug, I feel uneasy. Maybe it’s a need for control, but I feel like not understanding the configuration is not doing yourself any favors when it comes time to debug.
- flybayer 5y ago
  The magic is very minimal and easily inspectable via the network tab of browser dev tools. We essentially just provide a transparent pipe between client and server. Whatever you return from the function on the server is exactly what comes out on the client. We don't interfere with that. All we do is handle all the HTTP stuff for you. Some have expressed the same concern, but after using it they’ve had zero issues.
leerob 5y ago
I'm sorry about the poor experience with Next.js. Are there any issues in particular I can look into? We frequently cut canary releases to get bug fixes out, so that might have been the suggestion from the team. Regardless, happy to take a look.
tluyben2 5y ago
I am old and I cringe when I see most of the 'modern stuff'. It is just simply a minefield and dangerous to use. I work in banking and have to sign off on everything used for decades in the future potentially: not much of what is in these frameworks on frameworks on bugs on frameworks qualifies even basic scrutiny but devs do want to use them because they read on hn/reddit it is the new thing. Painful struggle Edit: I do not mean to say people should stop making new things or trying to improve upon older ideas; just saying most this stuff needs huge ALPHA/experimental stamps on it.
- lstamour 5y ago
  It's partly a reflection of the web and web browsers. Yes, the goal is "don't break the web," but with each new release the odds that a website from "decades in the past" will continue to work today are slim. I don't mean that a simple HTML page won't work, but rather that HTML and other web standards are living - and compatibility often breaks when it's noticed that public web pages don't use features (low adoption) or when features are removed for security or privacy reasons. When you get used to re-learning everything on a monthly basis, it's easy to adopt new approaches. In fact, the Web Components movement, including lit-element, is basically built on the idea that you should write code for the browser, and thus your codebase must evolve as the browser does. If you look at it from the perspective of "this code must work forever," well, I'm not sure the browser is the right place to be. Have you considered shipping an old and outdated copy of a browser, such as Electron? ;-) Edit: That said, I do agree there's a lot of reinvent-the-wheel in NPM-land, but I don't think the best possible wheel has been invented yet, so I appreciate having options. TypeScript is a great example: they're continuing to rapidly evolve the language with each point release yet they also centrally maintain DefinitelyTyped to be backwards compatible to previous releases. This means maintainers don't have to manually update their types for each point-release of TypeScript. If you look for that, you'll see a lot of "automatic backwards compatibility" in places. JS Codemods for example, can automatically update minor and sometimes major versions of React. Not everything is pre-1.0 and experimental, but the new stuff is definitely shinier.
  - mekkkkkk 5y ago

pssdbt 5y ago

Framework on top of a framework using a UI library, but close enough.

flybayer 5y ago

Yep, nothing new. It’s abstractions all the way down :)