4 ms·

You like to live in hard mode. I like that.

by adabaed 5y ago

CoryAlexMartin 5y ago
Building a website without JS is not hard.
- adabaed 5y ago
  Depends of what a website is for you.
  - dmitriid 5y ago
    The same it is for everyone since the beginning of WWW: a static page with images. The web is uniquely unsuitable for anything else.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - cutler 5y ago
      So forget e-commerce? Amazon didn't do too badly and CGI was hot on the heels of HTML so I think "everyone" is a little exaggerated.
      - dmitriid 5y ago
        > So forget e-commerce? Says (s)he and immediately follows up with > Amazon didn't do too badly
        cutler 5y ago
        My point is that the WWW was a lot more than static HTML and CSS pretty soon after its inception.
        dmitriid 5y ago
        You're confusing displaying different information at different URLs with being "more than static HTML and CSS".
    - TomGullen 5y ago
      This is a very old fashioned point of view I’m afraid, things have moved on.
      - Noobdevs 5y ago
  - Noobdevs 5y ago
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - adabaed 5y ago
      I know enough to don't feel the need to demonstrate a random guy in a forum that I know more about a topic.
      - Noobdevs 5y ago
- The_suffocated 5y ago
  May I ask how to create a Mathematics Stack Exchange clone without JS?
  - adabaed 5y ago
    PHP and cocaine.
  - jhgb 5y ago
    What part of a Mathematics Stack Exchange clone would require JS?
    - tazjin 5y ago
      In "modern" stacks it is preferable to do things like layouting of formulas millions of times on the clients, instead of once on the server. I guess that sort of thing needs JS.
      - southerntofu 5y ago
        As you have pointed out, but formulated more explicitly: client-side rendering should deal only with HTML/CSS because that's what the browser is built and optimized for. Every line of script changing the DOM (html structure) may trigger a redraw of the page, which means wasting considerable amount of resources! But even if your script outputs HTML only once, you still have O(n) HTML templating instead of O(1) for n clients. Such a waste!
    - The_suffocated 5y ago
      The MathJax part.
      - jhgb 5y ago
        MathJax is somewhat convenient but doesn't seem necessary at all.
  - est 5y ago
    In the past Latex symbols were rendered on server as an image. It was not pretty but it works virtually anywhere.
rambambram 5y ago
How old are you?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
unbanned 5y ago
Completely agree
southerntofu 5y ago
Building a website in raw HTML/CSS is much easier than the equivalent in javascript-framework-du-jour. It's also much lighter on resources both on server and client. It's a win-win situation for everyone, especially for clients with less powerful computers.

You like to live in hard mode. I like that.

CoryAlexMartin 5y ago

Building a website without JS is not hard.

adabaed 5y ago
Depends of what a website is for you.
- dmitriid 5y ago
  The same it is for everyone since the beginning of WWW: a static page with images. The web is uniquely unsuitable for anything else.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - cutler 5y ago
    So forget e-commerce? Amazon didn't do too badly and CGI was hot on the heels of HTML so I think "everyone" is a little exaggerated.
    - dmitriid 5y ago
      > So forget e-commerce? Says (s)he and immediately follows up with > Amazon didn't do too badly
      - cutler 5y ago
        My point is that the WWW was a lot more than static HTML and CSS pretty soon after its inception.
        dmitriid 5y ago
        You're confusing displaying different information at different URLs with being "more than static HTML and CSS".
  - TomGullen 5y ago
    This is a very old fashioned point of view I’m afraid, things have moved on.
    - Noobdevs 5y ago
- Noobdevs 5y ago
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - adabaed 5y ago
    I know enough to don't feel the need to demonstrate a random guy in a forum that I know more about a topic.
    - Noobdevs 5y ago
The_suffocated 5y ago
May I ask how to create a Mathematics Stack Exchange clone without JS?
- adabaed 5y ago
  PHP and cocaine.
- jhgb 5y ago
  What part of a Mathematics Stack Exchange clone would require JS?
  - tazjin 5y ago
    In "modern" stacks it is preferable to do things like layouting of formulas millions of times on the clients, instead of once on the server. I guess that sort of thing needs JS.
    - southerntofu 5y ago
      As you have pointed out, but formulated more explicitly: client-side rendering should deal only with HTML/CSS because that's what the browser is built and optimized for. Every line of script changing the DOM (html structure) may trigger a redraw of the page, which means wasting considerable amount of resources! But even if your script outputs HTML only once, you still have O(n) HTML templating instead of O(1) for n clients. Such a waste!
  - The_suffocated 5y ago
    The MathJax part.
    - jhgb 5y ago
      MathJax is somewhat convenient but doesn't seem necessary at all.
- est 5y ago
  In the past Latex symbols were rendered on server as an image. It was not pretty but it works virtually anywhere.

rambambram 5y ago

How old are you?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

unbanned 5y ago

Completely agree

southerntofu 5y ago

Building a website in raw HTML/CSS is much easier than the equivalent in javascript-framework-du-jour. It's also much lighter on resources both on server and client. It's a win-win situation for everyone, especially for clients with less powerful computers.