4 ms·

It's worth mentioning that it seems like you need to use react with this.

trueadm 5y ago
You don't need React. Lexical has no dependencies, so you can build bindings for your framework/library of choice. There are folks working on a SolidJS implementation right now. You could also do it with VanillaJS if you wanted too. The reason we have React bindings from the start, is because we needed these internally at Meta.
- distrill 5y ago
  GP may be responding to the fact that the vanilla quick start page is empty while the react one is not https://lexical.dev/docs/getting-started/quick-start https://lexical.dev/docs/getting-started/quick-start
  - trueadm 5y ago
    Yeah, we're still working on our docs. Watch this space! :)
    - kingcharles 5y ago
      It would seem the very first thing you would do is provide an example for vanilla JS so that everyone could get started. It is impossible to use this at all for the large proportion of the world that isn't using React as we can't even see a single example. If it's so complicated to use that it takes more than a minute of vanilla JS coding to initialize it, then I don't think I'm interested, thanks all the same.
      - motoxpro 5y ago
        They use it internally, why would they rebuild it in vanilla before they released it? Sounds like they are working on it even though it's of no use to them.
  - endisneigh 5y ago
    yeah - I didn't see any examples on how to use this without react.
- akemichan 5y ago
  Any particular reason Meta decided to implement it's own editor library instead of building on top of ProseMirror?
  - trueadm 5y ago
    ProseMirror wasn't a good fit for us because it's integration (especially with React 18+) isn't quite there. Furthermore, we're also looking into building native ports of Lexical, and given's Lexical's API isn't DOM centric, it allows us to do that. Lastly, we found ProseMirror was too heavy in terms of bytes for very minimal almost plain-text interfaces where we only wanted mentions + hashtags + custom emojis. Lexical comes in at around 22kb min+gzip, so it works really well for us.

You don't need React. Lexical has no dependencies, so you can build bindings for your framework/library of choice. There are folks working on a SolidJS implementation right now. You could also do it with VanillaJS if you wanted too. The reason we have React bindings from the start, is because we needed these internally at Meta.

distrill 5y ago
GP may be responding to the fact that the vanilla quick start page is empty while the react one is not https://lexical.dev/docs/getting-started/quick-start https://lexical.dev/docs/getting-started/quick-start
- trueadm 5y ago
  Yeah, we're still working on our docs. Watch this space! :)
  - kingcharles 5y ago
    It would seem the very first thing you would do is provide an example for vanilla JS so that everyone could get started. It is impossible to use this at all for the large proportion of the world that isn't using React as we can't even see a single example. If it's so complicated to use that it takes more than a minute of vanilla JS coding to initialize it, then I don't think I'm interested, thanks all the same.
    - motoxpro 5y ago
      They use it internally, why would they rebuild it in vanilla before they released it? Sounds like they are working on it even though it's of no use to them.
- endisneigh 5y ago
  yeah - I didn't see any examples on how to use this without react.
akemichan 5y ago
Any particular reason Meta decided to implement it's own editor library instead of building on top of ProseMirror?
- trueadm 5y ago
  ProseMirror wasn't a good fit for us because it's integration (especially with React 18+) isn't quite there. Furthermore, we're also looking into building native ports of Lexical, and given's Lexical's API isn't DOM centric, it allows us to do that. Lastly, we found ProseMirror was too heavy in terms of bytes for very minimal almost plain-text interfaces where we only wanted mentions + hashtags + custom emojis. Lexical comes in at around 22kb min+gzip, so it works really well for us.