4 ms·
I still find that HTMX et al. have weird tooling. I get so much value out of a debugger, especially with event handling, and getting a weird mystery Alpine/HTMX
by graypegg 3y ago
I still find that HTMX et al. have weird tooling. I get so much value out of a debugger, especially with event handling, and getting a weird mystery Alpine/HTMX/Hotwire call stack back is kind of weird.
Still though, I like it in theory. JSX still feels closer to an “ideal” syntax to me, even if there’s a lot to complain about there as well.
- alexpetros 3y agoNo question this is true. I do think that the relative immaturity of the these frameworks (from a secondary tools standpoint) is balanced out by the fact that the in-browser debugger is much closer to the actual code you wrote, something I wrote about previously[0]. Definitely more work to be done in this area though, and I tried to keep this post mostly theoretical for that reason. [0]: https://htmx.org/essays/no-build-step/#developer-experience https://htmx.org/essays/no-build-step/#developer-experience
- graypegg 3y agoOh heya man! I’ll give it a closer read when I’m not wasting time at work on HN haha I will say TS source mapping gives me a near identical experience to debugging JS. Even if it’s another artefact to cart around, it’s near invisible once set up. It feels close enough to the actual code I write. While a debugger looking at an HTMX app does show exactly what is running at that moment, it peels back the mental model HTMX sets up to reveal the inner workings. That I feel like could be more confusing for folks learning. Thanks for making cool stuff though! :) (genuine! The internet can be a snarky place)