5 ms·
I wouldn’t consider htmx “battle tested”.
by devmunchies 3y ago
I wouldn’t consider htmx “battle tested”.
- foul 3y agoIsn't htmx intercooler.js without jquery, which is (intercooler) a 10 years old library been used extensively in a lot of sites?
- outofpaper 3y agoEssentially yes. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23331672 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23331672
- devmunchies 3y agofunny, the reason i say its not battle tested is because of an issue i discovered in the extension system that was mentioned in that post.
- Takennickname 3y ago[flagged]
- dgb23 3y agoAside: htmx is a very small and very predictable library. The underlying pattern is well established among many libraries and probably countless similar implementations. I have implemented something like htmx several times before htmx came out, and I assume many others have too. I just didn't take the time to extract a clean, generalized and comprehensive library.
- devmunchies 3y agoI personally found a glaring performance issue in the library related to plugins and created a github issue for it back in December (I don't think it's been fixed to date). I was confused because it was pretty obvious. "Battle tested" things, by definition, have been through battles and don't have as many easy pickings on optimizations.