4 ms·
What I originally meant by the "component-centered model" of React is not that it gives you a prefab list of elements to include on a page. I meant that it give
by nfw2 4y ago
What I originally meant by the "component-centered model" of React is not that it gives you a prefab list of elements to include on a page. I meant that it gives a framework for organizing custom logic to coordinate the behavior of some DOM subtree.
Also the library you linked can hardly be considered vanilla HTML/CSS/JS
- pjmlp 4y agoJust like JSF was doing 20 years ago. It surely is more vanilla, as originally it was designed to work with JavaScript disabled, if so desired.
- nfw2 4y agoIf JSF has abstractions that encapsulate arbitrary units of logic running on the client, then it is a frontend framework, by definition of frontend framework. If it doesn't, then we aren't talking about the same thing. Also vanilla HTML/JS does not mean html that works if JS is disabled. It means you are literally writing out the document that is delivered to the user without transformations or a huge runtime library included. This JSF is not vanilla HTML: <p:commandButton value="Update event2" update="@obs(event2)" icon="pi pi-check"/>
- pjmlp 4y agoYou are using the old syntax, there is also the HTML 5 one with data attributes, just like all those lovely SPAs. Still the point holds, component frameworks exist for 20 years, it isn't an invention of cool kids JS SPAs, and they work without JS if needed.