3 ms·

React continues to describe itself as only a library, and IMO that's still all that it is. The author argues this point: > if you choose to forgo a framework,

React continues to describe itself as only a library, and IMO that's still all that it is. The author argues this point: > if you choose to forgo a framework, what you're really choosing is to build your own bespoke framework

recursive 4y ago
It's hard to take the "library" claim seriously, when React has its own source code language that needs to be compiled to be used in any practical way.
- cantSpellSober 4y ago
  JSX predates React, React does not require JSX; it's not "its own source code". Bootstrap was written in Less, that needs to be compiled. Is Bootstrap a library?
  - jbergens 4y ago
    No, JSX was created by Meta (Facebook) when they developed React. It dos not predate it.
  - recursive 4y ago
    Approximately no one uses React without JSX. Probably because writing react that way kills a lot of the utility of it. It's possible to use only the built output of bootstrap as a static CSS file. The nature of react is that your own code is in the other language, so it's fundamentally different than the bootstrap situation.
    - nightski 4y ago
      I think it has more to do with JSX being really good, rather than killing the utility of it.
      - recursive 4y ago
        I mean, JSX is fine. (mostly) But the fact of its existence, and ubiquity of its use shows that, as it's actually used, React is much closer to a framework than a library. It has a step in the build. That's not library behavior.
        cantSpellSober 4y ago
        Fine, let's call it a "framework". Then I still think the was it's actually used is with another "framework" (and it's annoying)
    - trynewideas 4y ago
      The better argument is that JSX is just syntactic sugar. It's just Javascript driving around in a fancy HTML-colored car.
      - recursive 4y ago
        React is pretty hard to stomach without that sugar. It's practically pretty hard to use without. The way it's actually used in the real world (with JSX) it doesn't quack like a library.
    - cantSpellSober 4y ago
      > It's possible to use only the built output of bootstrap as a static CSS file Correct, it "needs to be compiled to be used in any practical way". That was your criticism of React, and the reason it didn't qualify as a library. Bootstrap was written in Less, that needs to be built. Is Bootstrap a library?

recursive 4y ago

It's hard to take the "library" claim seriously, when React has its own source code language that needs to be compiled to be used in any practical way.

cantSpellSober 4y ago
JSX predates React, React does not require JSX; it's not "its own source code". Bootstrap was written in Less, that needs to be compiled. Is Bootstrap a library?
- jbergens 4y ago
  No, JSX was created by Meta (Facebook) when they developed React. It dos not predate it.
- recursive 4y ago
  Approximately no one uses React without JSX. Probably because writing react that way kills a lot of the utility of it. It's possible to use only the built output of bootstrap as a static CSS file. The nature of react is that your own code is in the other language, so it's fundamentally different than the bootstrap situation.
  - nightski 4y ago
    I think it has more to do with JSX being really good, rather than killing the utility of it.
    - recursive 4y ago
      I mean, JSX is fine. (mostly) But the fact of its existence, and ubiquity of its use shows that, as it's actually used, React is much closer to a framework than a library. It has a step in the build. That's not library behavior.
      - cantSpellSober 4y ago
        Fine, let's call it a "framework". Then I still think the was it's actually used is with another "framework" (and it's annoying)
  - trynewideas 4y ago
    The better argument is that JSX is just syntactic sugar. It's just Javascript driving around in a fancy HTML-colored car.
    - recursive 4y ago
      React is pretty hard to stomach without that sugar. It's practically pretty hard to use without. The way it's actually used in the real world (with JSX) it doesn't quack like a library.
  - cantSpellSober 4y ago
    > It's possible to use only the built output of bootstrap as a static CSS file Correct, it "needs to be compiled to be used in any practical way". That was your criticism of React, and the reason it didn't qualify as a library. Bootstrap was written in Less, that needs to be built. Is Bootstrap a library?