5 ms·

Would this example be considered "trivial"? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GObi93tjZI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GObi93tjZI But also, you can mix thing

by Xeamek 3y ago

Would this example be considered "trivial"? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GObi93tjZI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GObi93tjZI But also, you can mix things togheter. You can just use react based app 'embeded' into mpa for when you need that heavy lifting, and the same keep the content part of your app simple. "But why would i do that, if i'd already use react for some parts, why not every where". Becuase then it leads to abominations like reddit or facebook, where websites that are basically glorified text forums will use gigabytes of memory, have terrible UX, be slow and will crash your browser if you leave them open for too long.

phist_mcgee 3y ago
Cool what Contexte did with HTMX, but personally I really dislike the amount of data packed into those HTML templates, those hx-get attributes are frighteningly long.
morbicer 3y ago
The wall of HTML soup he shows for facet "component" (time 11.33) is something I don't want to ever see again in professional setting. Stringly typed logic and CSS / JS somewhere miles away in directory structure making it very hard to reason about. I very much prefer sticking to small, composable, encapsulated, actual components made in React or sth similar.
- Xeamek 3y ago
  That file has like, 60 lines. Calling it a "wall of HTML soup" is a bit disingenuous. But if you REALLY have that much aversion to code, there is no inherent reason why you couldn't split it even more. CSS being miles away is again, just a matter of taste. No inherent reason why you could't use Tailwind for example.
  - morbicer 3y ago
    > why you could't use Tailwind for example To have even more HTML soup? No thanks. Luckily I live in a world of better DX. With styled-components my CSS primitives are typechecked. Hell even with SCSS and CSS modules I have more sane and IDE supported experience.
    - Xeamek 3y ago
      But this styling lives in your component file, doesn't it? So it makes just as much "wall of [code] soup there as it makes it here". Tailwind was just an example pointing out you don't need a separate your code across entirely different directories, not recommendation of specific technology
davedx 3y ago
I don’t like Facebook but claiming it’s a “glorified text forum” is utterly absurd. Please argue in good faith here
- Xeamek 3y ago
  But it is though? I'm not talking about everything facebook provides, but main content page is just a list of posts with with discussion underneath them. Sure, you can embed some media into the it, but still. There is nothing inherently different about structure of facebook post compared to a post on a forum. And yet, despite everything facebook is doing, the most (and only) reliable way to load new comments under the post is to force refresh entire site. Except it's not easy anymore, because facebook tries to be SPA. So we gave up simple and reliable solutions in favour of over engineering that doesn't even work. And all that for no good reason, other then being trendy and having an SPA
  - bryanrasmussen 3y ago
    >But it is though? At some point quantitative change achieves a qualitative effect. I would think Facebook or LinkedIn or Twitter have all reached that qualitative effect to change from being just a discussion forum. However qualitatively the social functions of these apps present an extra functionality missing from traditional discussion forums. Being able to track users, notifications of the users updates, blocking certain users from being in the message - which is a traditional messaging function not found in discussion forums. Suggestions of people or subjects to follow given on what you have done in the past, weighted based on various algorithms to determine how recent your past activity was and what your current interests seem to be.. I'm sure you could think of a load of other functions that are not traditional discussion forum functionalities.
    - Xeamek 3y ago
      I don't know if you are doing that intentionally, but you are completely ignoring the context of the argument, which is advocating of mixing and matching statically generated content and using component based spas only where it's needed. In the parent coment alone I emphasized that I acknowledge that Facebook as a whole provides more then just a forum, but it's core content inherently doesn't differ much from being one. Moreover, functionality like notifications or suggestions are inherently server generated, as such they don't require content itself to be served in specific way.

by Xeamek 3y ago

phist_mcgee 3y ago

Cool what Contexte did with HTMX, but personally I really dislike the amount of data packed into those HTML templates, those hx-get attributes are frighteningly long.

morbicer 3y ago

The wall of HTML soup he shows for facet "component" (time 11.33) is something I don't want to ever see again in professional setting. Stringly typed logic and CSS / JS somewhere miles away in directory structure making it very hard to reason about. I very much prefer sticking to small, composable, encapsulated, actual components made in React or sth similar.

Xeamek 3y ago
That file has like, 60 lines. Calling it a "wall of HTML soup" is a bit disingenuous. But if you REALLY have that much aversion to code, there is no inherent reason why you couldn't split it even more. CSS being miles away is again, just a matter of taste. No inherent reason why you could't use Tailwind for example.
- morbicer 3y ago
  > why you could't use Tailwind for example To have even more HTML soup? No thanks. Luckily I live in a world of better DX. With styled-components my CSS primitives are typechecked. Hell even with SCSS and CSS modules I have more sane and IDE supported experience.
  - Xeamek 3y ago
    But this styling lives in your component file, doesn't it? So it makes just as much "wall of [code] soup there as it makes it here". Tailwind was just an example pointing out you don't need a separate your code across entirely different directories, not recommendation of specific technology

davedx 3y ago

I don’t like Facebook but claiming it’s a “glorified text forum” is utterly absurd. Please argue in good faith here

Xeamek 3y ago
But it is though? I'm not talking about everything facebook provides, but main content page is just a list of posts with with discussion underneath them. Sure, you can embed some media into the it, but still. There is nothing inherently different about structure of facebook post compared to a post on a forum. And yet, despite everything facebook is doing, the most (and only) reliable way to load new comments under the post is to force refresh entire site. Except it's not easy anymore, because facebook tries to be SPA. So we gave up simple and reliable solutions in favour of over engineering that doesn't even work. And all that for no good reason, other then being trendy and having an SPA
- bryanrasmussen 3y ago
  >But it is though? At some point quantitative change achieves a qualitative effect. I would think Facebook or LinkedIn or Twitter have all reached that qualitative effect to change from being just a discussion forum. However qualitatively the social functions of these apps present an extra functionality missing from traditional discussion forums. Being able to track users, notifications of the users updates, blocking certain users from being in the message - which is a traditional messaging function not found in discussion forums. Suggestions of people or subjects to follow given on what you have done in the past, weighted based on various algorithms to determine how recent your past activity was and what your current interests seem to be.. I'm sure you could think of a load of other functions that are not traditional discussion forum functionalities.
  - Xeamek 3y ago
    I don't know if you are doing that intentionally, but you are completely ignoring the context of the argument, which is advocating of mixing and matching statically generated content and using component based spas only where it's needed. In the parent coment alone I emphasized that I acknowledge that Facebook as a whole provides more then just a forum, but it's core content inherently doesn't differ much from being one. Moreover, functionality like notifications or suggestions are inherently server generated, as such they don't require content itself to be served in specific way.