4 ms·
Isn't this how webpages used to work with jquery? Are you telling me everything just went full circle back?
by noobermin 4y ago
Isn't this how webpages used to work with jquery? Are you telling me everything just went full circle back?
- techdragon 4y agoYep, we’re reinventing all the classic server side templating tech, but with “front end frameworks”… which I suppose is actually making them “full stack frameworks” but that’s beside the point.
- ratww 4y agoI wouldn't call it reinventing. We're just using newer client-side frameworks to also render things on the server, because for lots of people there is a clear advantage in using such frameworks rather than old templating engines. Advantages often include more ergonomic APIs and code-sharing.
- dgb23 4y ago> which I suppose is actually making them “full stack frameworks” but that’s beside the point. No that _is_ the point.
- dismantlethesun 4y agoYes! But with Jquery you had to manually separate out the interactive elements ship those to the client. With newer frameworks (Svelte, Fresh), the framework itself automatically parses out the interactive elements and ships them. There's no context switch between interactive and non-interactive either, since all rendering is done with the same language and framework, and even the same file. I think this is great. I didn't hate jQuery. I just hated the context switch between regular HTML templates, and creating a jQuery component. If the entire frontend can be treated uniformly, that's a huge plus.
- noobermin 4y agoI guess the lack of context switch seems like it would be easier on the brain. I guess the actual working of static + dynamic bits unlike how it is now with everything dynamic is more of a "how it works is similar" thing while the coding is coherent unlike jquery.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- mypalmike 4y agoIn the same way that C was "full circle" from assembly because it had loops.