4 ms·
> It’s what rails copied for the Hotwire stuff It is not. From the outside the end result for the user might be similar, but that's where the similarities end
by midrus 5y ago
> It’s what rails copied for the Hotwire stuff
It is not. From the outside the end result for the user might be similar, but that's where the similarities end. Elixir's LiveView what I assume you're talking about keeps state on the server, in memory, and sychronizes changes back to the client over a websocket. Hotwire is "stateless" in the sense that no end user state is kept in memory on the server across requests. You can also use most of Hotwire without websockets.
My previous company was using Elixir, and they moved away from it because everything took longer to develop, the ecosystem of libraries was very lacking, the tooling (such as editor support) was terrible, and it was very difficult to hire experienced developers.
Performance wise, I agree, it is faster and you will use less servers. A nice problem to have to be honest.
- engineerDave 5y agoWhen I say copy I don't mean implementation but inspiration. They may not have copied it exactly in implementation, it is FP vs OO, but stimulus.js was a direct response to LiveView. I don't think there is anything wrong with that however I welcome any advancement that requires less JS.
- midrus 5y agoIf we're talking about inspiration, then maybe it goes the opposite way? Given Turbolinks existed many years before even elixir or phoenix existed. In fact the creator of elixir was a very prominent rails dev. But I insist, they have almost nothing in common other than maybe the end user result. The approaches they take are architecturally very different and with very different trade offs.
- engineerDave 5y agoThey're his words not mine. Go fight with him if you think otherwise https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Of1phFsC4ZI&t=3290s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Of1phFsC4ZI&t=3290s