4 ms·
In addition to which, jQuery was actual useful - React is just pure overhead with no real functionality.
by commandlinefan 4y ago
In addition to which, jQuery was actual useful - React is just pure overhead with no real functionality.
- klysm 4y agoI don’t understand how you can claim that react is pure overhead. Sure it does have overhead, but it’s also a really useful abstraction. How composable abstraction for UI components that enables local reasoning not functionality. jQuery is just pure overhead with no real functionality compared to vanilla js.
- smarkov 4y agoReact is vastly overused. You don't need every single element in your page to be a separate component when 95% of your site is pure text and you have an occasional form or a button here and there. If you're making an actual application (think Discord/Spotify) then yes, it becomes a necessary abstraction. Your personal website or news website (or many others) using React is a waste of my bandwidth and CPU cycles.
- dbud 4y agoDon’t forget about server side rendering. If you only need to serve static, you don’t really need any Jack, anyway.
- klysm 4y agoAgreed it doesn’t make sense for a lot of things that could just be static sites. But you also wouldn’t need jQuery on such sites so I’m not sure why that matters.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- tofuahdude 4y agoReact's core functionality is to manage the relationship between state and the dom. jQuery lets you imperatively manipulate the dom. They're different use cases; calling one useful and the other not isn't a very accurate representation.
- eastbound 4y agoNo, React’s strength is to componentize your webapp, allowing several teams to work on objects that can be reused by each other.
- tofuahdude 4y agoSure, it does that too, but that is not its runtime purpose. Many, many approaches solve organizing your code; React is in the middle of a large pack here.