4 ms·

I have been reading articles like this for the last 10 years. I'm not sure why people complain about SPAs. Guess what, in the mean time as some MPA frameworks

I have been reading articles like this for the last 10 years. I'm not sure why people complain about SPAs. Guess what, in the mean time as some MPA frameworks have been made, the whole web has been moving towards webassembly. Say goodbye to MPA HTML, say hello to Rust with custom UI based on WebGPU transpiled to webassembly.

oblak 4y ago
As a JS developer, I think this is correct and kind of fear for my future. Time for this old dawg to learn something new again. Thing is, I think I am not good enough for system level programming. I've only done rust to the extend of going just a step beyond "hello world". I've also read good things about Go. Decisions, decisions.
- adamnemecek 4y ago
  > think I am not good enough for system level programming I think that this is the wrong way to think about it, the languages and tools for systems programming suck. I would recommend you check out Rust, it make systems programming really pleasant. Like I have been programming C++ for 25 years and somehow I'm a lot more comfortable with writing Rust even though I have seriously written Rust for only like 1.5 years.
teg4n_ 4y ago
It really hasn’t been moving towards web assembly. Web assembly is not magic performance pixie dust and it generally has pretty bad bundle size. You need pretty specific scenarios to get genuine improvements with web assembly over JavaScript.
- adamnemecek 4y ago
  > magic performance pixie dust It is. I can finally have value types which let me access properties without incurring the overhead of a JIT. > and it generally has pretty bad bundle size For now. So do websites btw.
Hayvok 4y ago
> I'm not sure why people complain about SPAs. … say hello to Rust with custom UI based on WebGPU transpiled to webassembly If this is the future, then no wonder everyone is running back to just shipping HTML over the wire. All this has gotten too complicated.
- adamnemecek 4y ago
  Right because dealing with CSS hacks transpilation to target older browser versions is both simple & pleasant.
  - paulryanrogers 4y ago
    Wait we have to support older browsers? IME if you're not on the latest Chrome release, or one prior, then you're on your own. Any other browser or older release is rarely a serious concern.
- hirvi74 4y ago
  I think Web Development has been trending towards being obnoxious no matter how you spin it for many many years now. All these frameworks, doing too much magic under the hood, were supposed to make things easier, in some form or fashion, but I feel like each one always come with their own problems. Are things actually easier when developing with them? While I understand nothing is perfect, it doesn't help but add so much complexity into many applications for no reason. If over half of all websites when back to plain HTML/CSS/JS, I do not think the world would suddenly stop. I feel like a majority of people building web applications are using a development methodology I read on here years ago that was jokingly called, "Resume-Driven Development." I've still not really ever heard a convincing argument for SPAs for websites (web applications could be a different debate, but it also could be a false dichotomy). However, I find myself getting urges to learn one of these SPA frameworks, not because I think it will benefit much of what I do, but because that is obligatory in staying competitive in my market.
david2ndaccount 4y ago
If wasm becomes good enough to replace JS, it will not be rust. It will be easier to use languages like C#.
- adamnemecek 4y ago
  If someone will build a GUI cross platform toolkit it will be in Rust, not C#. I find Rust more pleasant to use than C#. If you had said F#, I woud be like "maybe" but not C#.
  - lowwave 4y ago
    yeah while c# is more pleasant than Java, but not compare to the ease of a functional language.
- marcosdumay 4y ago
  I disagree with calling C# "easy to use". But Rust is such a bad fit for wasm that any other language will probably displace it once it's viable. The DOM has it's own lifetime decisions, but lifetimes are the most central concern for Rust. I don't think both can be conciliated without a major rewrite of one of those parts.
gherkinnn 4y ago
So rebuild everything a browser does on canvas to make things easier? On what planet is that sensible? These ideas must come from people who have no intention to learn the languages required to build frontends, but want to stick to their systems language of choice. Not realising of course, that the problem space remains pixels and users and all the irritations that come with it.

oblak 4y ago

As a JS developer, I think this is correct and kind of fear for my future. Time for this old dawg to learn something new again. Thing is, I think I am not good enough for system level programming. I've only done rust to the extend of going just a step beyond "hello world". I've also read good things about Go. Decisions, decisions.

adamnemecek 4y ago
> think I am not good enough for system level programming I think that this is the wrong way to think about it, the languages and tools for systems programming suck. I would recommend you check out Rust, it make systems programming really pleasant. Like I have been programming C++ for 25 years and somehow I'm a lot more comfortable with writing Rust even though I have seriously written Rust for only like 1.5 years.

teg4n_ 4y ago

It really hasn’t been moving towards web assembly. Web assembly is not magic performance pixie dust and it generally has pretty bad bundle size. You need pretty specific scenarios to get genuine improvements with web assembly over JavaScript.

adamnemecek 4y ago
> magic performance pixie dust It is. I can finally have value types which let me access properties without incurring the overhead of a JIT. > and it generally has pretty bad bundle size For now. So do websites btw.

Hayvok 4y ago

> I'm not sure why people complain about SPAs. … say hello to Rust with custom UI based on WebGPU transpiled to webassembly If this is the future, then no wonder everyone is running back to just shipping HTML over the wire. All this has gotten too complicated.

adamnemecek 4y ago
Right because dealing with CSS hacks transpilation to target older browser versions is both simple & pleasant.
- paulryanrogers 4y ago
  Wait we have to support older browsers? IME if you're not on the latest Chrome release, or one prior, then you're on your own. Any other browser or older release is rarely a serious concern.
hirvi74 4y ago
I think Web Development has been trending towards being obnoxious no matter how you spin it for many many years now. All these frameworks, doing too much magic under the hood, were supposed to make things easier, in some form or fashion, but I feel like each one always come with their own problems. Are things actually easier when developing with them? While I understand nothing is perfect, it doesn't help but add so much complexity into many applications for no reason. If over half of all websites when back to plain HTML/CSS/JS, I do not think the world would suddenly stop. I feel like a majority of people building web applications are using a development methodology I read on here years ago that was jokingly called, "Resume-Driven Development." I've still not really ever heard a convincing argument for SPAs for websites (web applications could be a different debate, but it also could be a false dichotomy). However, I find myself getting urges to learn one of these SPA frameworks, not because I think it will benefit much of what I do, but because that is obligatory in staying competitive in my market.

david2ndaccount 4y ago

If wasm becomes good enough to replace JS, it will not be rust. It will be easier to use languages like C#.

adamnemecek 4y ago
If someone will build a GUI cross platform toolkit it will be in Rust, not C#. I find Rust more pleasant to use than C#. If you had said F#, I woud be like "maybe" but not C#.
- lowwave 4y ago
  yeah while c# is more pleasant than Java, but not compare to the ease of a functional language.
marcosdumay 4y ago
I disagree with calling C# "easy to use". But Rust is such a bad fit for wasm that any other language will probably displace it once it's viable. The DOM has it's own lifetime decisions, but lifetimes are the most central concern for Rust. I don't think both can be conciliated without a major rewrite of one of those parts.

gherkinnn 4y ago

So rebuild everything a browser does on canvas to make things easier? On what planet is that sensible? These ideas must come from people who have no intention to learn the languages required to build frontends, but want to stick to their systems language of choice. Not realising of course, that the problem space remains pixels and users and all the irritations that come with it.