4 ms·
Your entire argument is predicated on building an SPA; if you don't need an SPA then you de facto do not need a frontend framework (which is what the OP is impl
by virtualwhys 5y ago
Your entire argument is predicated on building an SPA; if you don't need an SPA then you de facto do not need a frontend framework (which is what the OP is implicitly saying, do as much as possible server-side).
Now, saying that, there is something to be said for separating UI from the backend. Yes, it adds (
a great deal of) complexity compared to server-side applications, but the reactive programming model is quite powerful, and useful even if you could build the application entirely on the server.
And obviously if you do need an SPA (e.g. wrapping WebView for iOS/Android) then you don't have a choice, or if you do you'll be reinventing the wheel, poorly.
- onion2k 5y agoYour entire argument is predicated on building an SPA There are frameworks that don't deliver an SPA - Next, Nuxt, Remix, etc. They also do a lot of work to remove as much frontend JS as they can, and more effort is going in to that delivery architecture at the moment. The idea is that devs write React or Vue based pages, and the framework figures out what the page actually needs and delivers only that code to the user. Routing is done on the server. They work very well.