6 ms·

https://shoelace.style/ https://shoelace.style/ or even https://opensource.adobe.com/spectrum-web-components/ https://opensource.adobe.com/spectrum-web-compon

https://shoelace.style/ https://shoelace.style/ or even https://opensource.adobe.com/spectrum-web-components/ https://opensource.adobe.com/spectrum-web-components/ are simply much better as they just work with native web standards. React is just another way FB/Meta hurts people :)

ramesh31 4y ago
>are simply much better as they just work with native web standards. React is just another way FB/Meta hurts people :) Sure, and all you need are 50+ dependencies to work with those "standards": https://www.npmjs.com/package/@shoelace-style/shoelace?activeTab=dependencies https://www.npmjs.com/package/@shoelace-style/shoelace?activ... If you're doing JS development, just use React. There's really no good reason not to, and I would argue that in an enterprise environment it would be negligent not to. If anyone can give a non-ideological reasoning for a better choice, I'd love to hear it.
- withinboredom 4y ago
  I’ve got a feeling this comment won’t age well…
- Existenceblinks 4y ago
  The less thing people know, the high risk, the more defensive. Like losing the entire basket of egg. In traditional way, they dedicated the whole life to one thing, and that was called a cult.
- Karunamon 4y ago
  I would argue that dev dependencies do not really matter. That leaves a mere 7, 2 of those belong to the same namespace as the style. That said I am also against choosing libraries based on political/ideological concerns. React is MIT anyways.
- claytongulick 4y ago
  Sure, I'll bite. The vdom and batching updates is slow, the theory behind it that direct manipulation of the dom is worse has been pretty conclusively shown to be incorrect, especially with css "contains". JSX doesn't end up bringing much value over vanilla html, but can lead to a lot of strange and difficult to reason about states. The "execute everything on every render" style ends up being extraordinarily costly and not particularly beneficial, especially when you add something like redux to the mix. Alternately, web components have a simple, lightweight and easy to understand life cycle. Reactivity is trivially implemented via property setters and a call to a render() method. Tiny, fast rendering libraries like lit-html work great, and for other components you can do without them completely, depending on the needs of the component. React needs at least one build step, which distances the developer's code from what executes. Vanilla web components are simple to wrap into framework components for pretty much any framework, and can be used natively by most. React components are limited to react things, unless you want to include an absurd js payload size. And "just use react" doesn't really mean anything. What version? With what methodology? Hooks? Class based? Look at how much it's changed. It's very costly for organizations to get caught up in the framework upgrade cycle. There's a reason why Ionic chose to base their components on native web components. I recommend you read about it.
  - dimgl 4y ago
    > JSX doesn't end up bringing much value over vanilla html, but can lead to a lot of strange and difficult to reason about states. This is just plain wrong. Like, unbelievably wrong.
  - dmitriid 4y ago
    > JSX doesn't end up bringing much value over vanilla html > Tiny, fast rendering libraries like lit-html work great, It's always funny to me how people bash JSX and then praise lit-html that literally has things like ?value and .click that it parses from strings using regexps, but it's somehow "better than react because native web standards". And lit in general is busy re-inventing react (working on context API as we speak).
    - Existenceblinks 4y ago
- Shacklz 4y ago
  > If you're doing JS development, just use React. I totally agree with your sentiment, but there are more frameworks out there with sufficient maturity to be considered enterprise-grade on the scale of react. Angular is certainly there, Vue as well at least in my book.
  - geraldwhen 4y ago
    Angular is an option from a high level but I would argue against it on merit. Vue is off the table. If you’re not prioritizing “ability to hire” with your tech choices you’re in for a bad time. Angular is popular enough that you would get a lot of candidates.
    - thebradbain 4y ago
      Why is Vue off the table? Where I work uses Vue rather than React, and we're _very_ happy with that choice. There's many reasons why (specifically the Composition API is similar to React Hooks, but in my opinion _much_ better thought out, and so is the fact that the state-management story is much more opinionated/first-party), but rather than start a framework war, I will say that every FE engineer we've hired who preciously worked at a React shop (which is all of them) has gotten the hang of Vue within a week and finds Vue a refreshing breath of fresh air. Me included. I think React without a doubt has the largest ecosystem. And I also think Vue is more than a valid choice, and definitely not a problem in the hiring sphere.
      - geraldwhen 4y ago
        Ability to hire. There are fewer vue developers and people tend to apply for jobs in tooling they already know.
- megaman821 4y ago
  First, dev dependencies don't count. There two are from shoelace. Color's main features will eventually be in one of the CSS Color Module's specs. Floating UI's main features will be in the CSS Anchor Positioning spec. Lit is used for building the web components. Lit React can be removed when React supports web components better. The QR library can probably only be installed if needed.
- cetinsert 4y ago
  1. You are not reading those numbers right! 2. Shoelace has far fewer dependencies than Ring. Let us see, Shoelace: https://www.npmjs.com/package/@shoelace-style/shoelace?activeTab=dependencies https://www.npmjs.com/package/@shoelace-style/shoelace?activ... 7 user dependencies 46 dev dependencies VS Ring: https://www.npmjs.com/package/@jetbrains/ring-ui?activeTab=dependencies https://www.npmjs.com/package/@jetbrains/ring-ui?activeTab=d... 60 user dependencies o____O 100 dev dependencies o__O Also the person building Shoelace has consistently been an early adopter of best practices/standards. I believe a single person with taste and knowledge can build better components than yet another team chasing after latest 'trends' under time pressure.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- huksley 4y ago
  It is not like I endorse (or don't appreciate) one or another, just a bit of stats npm install @shoelace-style/shoelace => 19MB, 17 packages npm install @jetbrains/ring-ui => 189MB, 560 packages
- the__alchemist 4y ago
  This depends on the use. For a complex web app, React may be a good choice. For a web page with interactivity (There is a grey area between), native HTML/JS/CSS provides a much more responsive experience to the user. Faster load, lower latency, and reduced RAM use. It also makes it easier to develop and maintain, due to not relying on a build process or DSL.
wbobeirne 4y ago
Who do you feel React is hurting, and in what way?
- ramesh31 4y ago
  >Who do you feel React is hurting, and in what way? There's an entire open source community that revolves around "React alternatives that exist because they're not React". For better or worse, people have ideological reasonings for their choice of JS framework. I've seen it play out countless times at multiple jobs between people who just want to get their work done with the industry standard tooling, and people who have a bone to pick with FB and become fanatical about using Vue/Svelte/*whatever instead of React. The contrarians usually win out, because the people who just want to do their job and go home don't care enough to fight that battle over and over again. The result is a patchwork of forgotten projects and frozen dependencies that no one knows how to maintain, and a security nightmare where everything is pulling in tons of random unmaintained NPM packages with 4 GitHub stars, rather than the battle tested 5 year old React equivalent with 2k stars.
  - bornfreddy 4y ago
    > ...and a security nightmare where everything is pulling in tons of random NPM packages with 4 GitHub stars. To be fair, this happens with React too (all the time). It has more to do with the JS ecosystem than with the framework of choice.
  - cercatrova 4y ago
    This is exactly why I use React after using libraries like Vue. The ecosystem matters, and non-React libraries are simply just not there. I want to make stuff, not wrangle around with poorly-supported dependencies.
- qwertox 4y ago
  My biggest issue with React is how it mixes HTML in Javascript. Like putting HTML inside strings or whatever they are doing. Without proper tooling and an editor which supports it, you won't get anywhere. At least that's my amateurish feeling on React, my reason for avoiding it. I may very well be wrong, but I wouldn't know.
Existenceblinks 4y ago
I don't love React but the examples you mentioned make web component look bad. It's as bad (bloat) as React. --- EDIT: add links of evidence https://github.com/adobe/spectrum-web-components/discussions/2506 https://github.com/adobe/spectrum-web-components/discussions... https://github.com/shoelace-style/shoelace/issues/525 https://github.com/shoelace-style/shoelace/issues/525 I've seen many people in this space often forget to utilize `import` and `export`, that is not trying to write composable modules so that it's treeshake-able.
dmitriid 4y ago
1. What "non-native" web standards does React work with? 2. Have the "non-hurting" web components solved all the issues that literally no other "no -native-standard" frameworks have? https://twitter.com/Rich_Harris/status/1198332398561353728 https://twitter.com/Rich_Harris/status/1198332398561353728 3. Why is it that all the issues that arise from Web Components merely existing are "solved" by throwing more and more Javascript at the platform (anything from form participation to anything else, really) 4. Could it be that it is Google as the main driving force behind web components is the one hurting people by making the platform ever more brittle and unimplementable?
qwertox 4y ago
Thank you for sharing the shoelace link. Looks like it behaves well on mobile, unlike many other frameworks. I'm using Quasar, but I want to try something else.
runlaszlorun 4y ago
Shoelace looks great, thx for posting! If you can think of any more in that vein- that is clean looking vanilla web components without adding a ton of ‘framework’- feel free to share. Personally, I’m of the believe that the bumbled mess that web development has become can only be fixed by peeling away layers (or perhaps starting from scratch) not adding more. I seem to be in the minority on this though…
rapfaria 4y ago
Thought web components were dead
whoisthemachine 4y ago
Weird that a framework created by Adobe, the creators of Flash, one of the most non-standard web ever created, would be cited as a web standard friendly alternative to React. Such is the way when a company loses its competitive advantage /shrug.
- nfoz 4y ago
  Adobe didn't create Flash. They bought out Macromedia.
  - whoisthemachine 4y ago
    Ha very true, the cobwebs of time had erased that from my memory.

ramesh31 4y ago

>are simply much better as they just work with native web standards. React is just another way FB/Meta hurts people :) Sure, and all you need are 50+ dependencies to work with those "standards": https://www.npmjs.com/package/@shoelace-style/shoelace?activeTab=dependencies https://www.npmjs.com/package/@shoelace-style/shoelace?activ... If you're doing JS development, just use React. There's really no good reason not to, and I would argue that in an enterprise environment it would be negligent not to. If anyone can give a non-ideological reasoning for a better choice, I'd love to hear it.

withinboredom 4y ago
I’ve got a feeling this comment won’t age well…
Existenceblinks 4y ago
The less thing people know, the high risk, the more defensive. Like losing the entire basket of egg. In traditional way, they dedicated the whole life to one thing, and that was called a cult.
Karunamon 4y ago
I would argue that dev dependencies do not really matter. That leaves a mere 7, 2 of those belong to the same namespace as the style. That said I am also against choosing libraries based on political/ideological concerns. React is MIT anyways.
claytongulick 4y ago
Sure, I'll bite. The vdom and batching updates is slow, the theory behind it that direct manipulation of the dom is worse has been pretty conclusively shown to be incorrect, especially with css "contains". JSX doesn't end up bringing much value over vanilla html, but can lead to a lot of strange and difficult to reason about states. The "execute everything on every render" style ends up being extraordinarily costly and not particularly beneficial, especially when you add something like redux to the mix. Alternately, web components have a simple, lightweight and easy to understand life cycle. Reactivity is trivially implemented via property setters and a call to a render() method. Tiny, fast rendering libraries like lit-html work great, and for other components you can do without them completely, depending on the needs of the component. React needs at least one build step, which distances the developer's code from what executes. Vanilla web components are simple to wrap into framework components for pretty much any framework, and can be used natively by most. React components are limited to react things, unless you want to include an absurd js payload size. And "just use react" doesn't really mean anything. What version? With what methodology? Hooks? Class based? Look at how much it's changed. It's very costly for organizations to get caught up in the framework upgrade cycle. There's a reason why Ionic chose to base their components on native web components. I recommend you read about it.
- dimgl 4y ago
  > JSX doesn't end up bringing much value over vanilla html, but can lead to a lot of strange and difficult to reason about states. This is just plain wrong. Like, unbelievably wrong.
- dmitriid 4y ago
  > JSX doesn't end up bringing much value over vanilla html > Tiny, fast rendering libraries like lit-html work great, It's always funny to me how people bash JSX and then praise lit-html that literally has things like ?value and .click that it parses from strings using regexps, but it's somehow "better than react because native web standards". And lit in general is busy re-inventing react (working on context API as we speak).
  - Existenceblinks 4y ago
Shacklz 4y ago
> If you're doing JS development, just use React. I totally agree with your sentiment, but there are more frameworks out there with sufficient maturity to be considered enterprise-grade on the scale of react. Angular is certainly there, Vue as well at least in my book.
- geraldwhen 4y ago
  Angular is an option from a high level but I would argue against it on merit. Vue is off the table. If you’re not prioritizing “ability to hire” with your tech choices you’re in for a bad time. Angular is popular enough that you would get a lot of candidates.
  - thebradbain 4y ago
    Why is Vue off the table? Where I work uses Vue rather than React, and we're _very_ happy with that choice. There's many reasons why (specifically the Composition API is similar to React Hooks, but in my opinion _much_ better thought out, and so is the fact that the state-management story is much more opinionated/first-party), but rather than start a framework war, I will say that every FE engineer we've hired who preciously worked at a React shop (which is all of them) has gotten the hang of Vue within a week and finds Vue a refreshing breath of fresh air. Me included. I think React without a doubt has the largest ecosystem. And I also think Vue is more than a valid choice, and definitely not a problem in the hiring sphere.
    - geraldwhen 4y ago
      Ability to hire. There are fewer vue developers and people tend to apply for jobs in tooling they already know.
megaman821 4y ago
First, dev dependencies don't count. There two are from shoelace. Color's main features will eventually be in one of the CSS Color Module's specs. Floating UI's main features will be in the CSS Anchor Positioning spec. Lit is used for building the web components. Lit React can be removed when React supports web components better. The QR library can probably only be installed if needed.
cetinsert 4y ago
1. You are not reading those numbers right! 2. Shoelace has far fewer dependencies than Ring. Let us see, Shoelace: https://www.npmjs.com/package/@shoelace-style/shoelace?activeTab=dependencies https://www.npmjs.com/package/@shoelace-style/shoelace?activ... 7 user dependencies 46 dev dependencies VS Ring: https://www.npmjs.com/package/@jetbrains/ring-ui?activeTab=dependencies https://www.npmjs.com/package/@jetbrains/ring-ui?activeTab=d... 60 user dependencies o____O 100 dev dependencies o__O Also the person building Shoelace has consistently been an early adopter of best practices/standards. I believe a single person with taste and knowledge can build better components than yet another team chasing after latest 'trends' under time pressure.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
huksley 4y ago
It is not like I endorse (or don't appreciate) one or another, just a bit of stats npm install @shoelace-style/shoelace => 19MB, 17 packages npm install @jetbrains/ring-ui => 189MB, 560 packages
the__alchemist 4y ago
This depends on the use. For a complex web app, React may be a good choice. For a web page with interactivity (There is a grey area between), native HTML/JS/CSS provides a much more responsive experience to the user. Faster load, lower latency, and reduced RAM use. It also makes it easier to develop and maintain, due to not relying on a build process or DSL.

wbobeirne 4y ago

Who do you feel React is hurting, and in what way?

ramesh31 4y ago
>Who do you feel React is hurting, and in what way? There's an entire open source community that revolves around "React alternatives that exist because they're not React". For better or worse, people have ideological reasonings for their choice of JS framework. I've seen it play out countless times at multiple jobs between people who just want to get their work done with the industry standard tooling, and people who have a bone to pick with FB and become fanatical about using Vue/Svelte/*whatever instead of React. The contrarians usually win out, because the people who just want to do their job and go home don't care enough to fight that battle over and over again. The result is a patchwork of forgotten projects and frozen dependencies that no one knows how to maintain, and a security nightmare where everything is pulling in tons of random unmaintained NPM packages with 4 GitHub stars, rather than the battle tested 5 year old React equivalent with 2k stars.
- bornfreddy 4y ago
  > ...and a security nightmare where everything is pulling in tons of random NPM packages with 4 GitHub stars. To be fair, this happens with React too (all the time). It has more to do with the JS ecosystem than with the framework of choice.
- cercatrova 4y ago
  This is exactly why I use React after using libraries like Vue. The ecosystem matters, and non-React libraries are simply just not there. I want to make stuff, not wrangle around with poorly-supported dependencies.
qwertox 4y ago
My biggest issue with React is how it mixes HTML in Javascript. Like putting HTML inside strings or whatever they are doing. Without proper tooling and an editor which supports it, you won't get anywhere. At least that's my amateurish feeling on React, my reason for avoiding it. I may very well be wrong, but I wouldn't know.

Existenceblinks 4y ago

I don't love React but the examples you mentioned make web component look bad. It's as bad (bloat) as React. --- EDIT: add links of evidence https://github.com/adobe/spectrum-web-components/discussions/2506 https://github.com/adobe/spectrum-web-components/discussions... https://github.com/shoelace-style/shoelace/issues/525 https://github.com/shoelace-style/shoelace/issues/525 I've seen many people in this space often forget to utilize `import` and `export`, that is not trying to write composable modules so that it's treeshake-able.

dmitriid 4y ago

1. What "non-native" web standards does React work with? 2. Have the "non-hurting" web components solved all the issues that literally no other "no -native-standard" frameworks have? https://twitter.com/Rich_Harris/status/1198332398561353728 https://twitter.com/Rich_Harris/status/1198332398561353728 3. Why is it that all the issues that arise from Web Components merely existing are "solved" by throwing more and more Javascript at the platform (anything from form participation to anything else, really) 4. Could it be that it is Google as the main driving force behind web components is the one hurting people by making the platform ever more brittle and unimplementable?

qwertox 4y ago

Thank you for sharing the shoelace link. Looks like it behaves well on mobile, unlike many other frameworks. I'm using Quasar, but I want to try something else.

runlaszlorun 4y ago

Shoelace looks great, thx for posting! If you can think of any more in that vein- that is clean looking vanilla web components without adding a ton of ‘framework’- feel free to share. Personally, I’m of the believe that the bumbled mess that web development has become can only be fixed by peeling away layers (or perhaps starting from scratch) not adding more. I seem to be in the minority on this though…

rapfaria 4y ago

Thought web components were dead

whoisthemachine 4y ago

Weird that a framework created by Adobe, the creators of Flash, one of the most non-standard web ever created, would be cited as a web standard friendly alternative to React. Such is the way when a company loses its competitive advantage /shrug.

nfoz 4y ago
Adobe didn't create Flash. They bought out Macromedia.
- whoisthemachine 4y ago
  Ha very true, the cobwebs of time had erased that from my memory.