3 ms·
Looking at the new Hotwire stuff. It’s neat from a technical perspective but looks dreadful to me. Why double down on a sloppy backend language when hardly any
by crystaln 3y ago
Looking at the new Hotwire stuff. It’s neat from a technical perspective but looks dreadful to me. Why double down on a sloppy backend language when hardly any of the needed logic for a web application is backend? Especially when the alternatives include a full stack of TypeScript, a robust, performant, strongly typed, fantastically tooled language?
I was an RoR developer for a decade. These code bases do not age well. The test requirements of loosely typed languages are so much greater. The lack of ability to automate refactors alone is enough to avoid ruby.
- wiseowise 3y agoWhat would be fully stack TS alternative to rails?
- 0xblinq 3y agoHa, that's the problem! Everyone will give you a different list of 143 packages (minimum). Also, the list they gave you will be different next month.
- spariev 3y agoLast time I checked it is perfectly possible to use anything including TS via jsbundling-rails and esbuild, so honestly I don’t understand what is the problem here. I’m also on a fence re Hotwire, but apparently it works for them in Basecamp and Hey, so that’s what they are investing into. Anecdotally, recently in Ruby shops I see an increase in new projects using Hotwire as a push back against bloated and hard to maintain React front ends and people are delighted how everything is easier now. RoR codebases are not the only ones which did not age well, I’ve seen quite a few React/NextJs legacy projects I would prefer not to touch at all. So I don’t think technology is the main culprit here.
- 0xblinq 3y agoIn my experience codebases that do not age well tell more about the developers and the managers than the tech stack. I've seen marvels and disasters in every stack.