4 ms·
Vue.js 3 + Vert.x backend (plus Nuxt if I needed SSR). If less interactivity were required, Rails (or rather Grails) and Alpine.js. But it's not that these tech
by gregopet 4y ago
Vue.js 3 + Vert.x backend (plus Nuxt if I needed SSR). If less interactivity were required, Rails (or rather Grails) and Alpine.js. But it's not that these technologies are inherently better than something else, I'd simply go with what I know & have had positive experience with. If you don't have any web experience, try to find a stack at least related to something you do know.
- r0b05 4y agoTrue, it does depend on familiarity. I haven't used Vue but it seems like a decent option.
- metadat 4y agoWhat is SSR? Server-Side Rendering?
- gregopet 4y agoYes - especially important for low end devices, it improves the first load after which the app behaves like a regular SPA.
- throw_m239339 4y agoSSR has absolutely nothing to do with computing performance, it's about network speed and SEO. Your react/angular site isn't going to run faster on low end smartphones or computers with SSR if you end up loading the entire react/angular app anyway. If you really care about low end devices, you would stick to HTML and use Javascript only when necessary and the least possible amount of it.
- eyelidlessness 4y ago> SSR has absolutely nothing to do with computing performance, it's about network speed and SEO. This is something I’d normally whisk by, but it’s bad in an Ask thread. It definitely has to a lot to do with performance. Even the worst-tuned apps are readable if they’re served as HTML and waiting for JS to become interactive. Better tuned apps SSR and follow the rest of your advice one way or another. Rendering nothing on the server is basically skipping performance as a first experience entirely.
- olavgg 4y agoGrails gsp and asset pipeline plugin is nice. Easy to use and great performance.