26 ms·
If you can easily switch to a framework like Rails from a SPA, it's probably a sign your app shouldn't have been a SPA. There's too much "defaultism" in our ind
by bdcravens 5y ago
If you can easily switch to a framework like Rails from a SPA, it's probably a sign your app shouldn't have been a SPA. There's too much "defaultism" in our industry.
- jack_riminton 5y agoAgree, unless your UI is very interactive and complex e.g. a photography editing app then you can likely go without an SPA Your designer might be pissed, but your customers probably don't care all that much and your CEO is going to be pleased at the speed, stability and simplicity of what you've created.
- fastball 5y agoAgreed, but additionally you might need/want an SPA because you want to be able to very quickly spin up mobile/desktop apps (e.g. with Capacitor/Electron) or you want a functional offline mode.
- bdcravens 5y agoI've run into plenty of apps that don't really look that great yet are SPAs. Like basic form post kind of sites. As I mentioned elsewhere, I got blocked paying a student loan due to one, and had to jump into Devtools to get a broken CVS app to submit a prescription request.
- hallway_monitor 5y agoThis and my sibling nailed it. Defaulting to a SPA is a terrible way to start web projects you would like to complete on time. But wait! Now your company has "front end devs" who you can't trust to touch your back end - better use React again to give these people something to do since JS is all they know.
- bdcravens 5y agoMy approach is Rails until the last possible moment. I'm no Rails maximalist - I did recently spin out a major part of our application into an Express service, as the Node library for a specific task was the best in breed. But I'm very defensive against signing my name on a complexity mortgage.