2 ms·

My thoughts are that dichotomy exists. There is whole world of difference between sprinkling some effects an making web app. We also have this dichotomy becau

by ozim 3y ago

My thoughts are that dichotomy exists. There is whole world of difference between sprinkling some effects an making web app. We also have this dichotomy because using frameworks is all or nothing deal. You mostly cannot just drop it in some place and then use it in other part. From the other side one also cannot really start adding some interactivity here and there to end up with web application. You either build an application and use framework or build a website sprinkling interactivity and effects here and there. Requirements are usually clear from the start. So the discussion is really that too many people use frameworks where they should not. Finally Wikipedia and Wordpress are not static site - their output is - but their editing capabilities are fully web apps as every CMS out there is an app and not website or something in between.

kcrwfrd_ 3y ago
FWIW I've been tinkering with Astro this week and it's possible to build a website with zero client-side JavaScript. I wonder if it's possible to achieve something similar in Next.js app router if you never have a "use client" component in your tree? In any case it seems like that's the latest trend, allowing us to use full-fledged frameworks (powered by plenty of JavaScript) while minimizing (potentially down to zero) the client-side JavaScript.
- solardev 3y ago
  This used to be possible with the page router, and was in fact one of the big selling points (graceful degradation down to raw HTML). I'd be surprised if the app router couldn't do something similar, though admittedly I haven't tried to do that yet. Anyone with experience?
  - kcrwfrd_ 3y ago
    I’m pretty sure you can’t achieve zero client-side JavaScript with pages router. You get pre-rendered HTML and it will gracefully degrade without executing JavaScript, yes…but it still comes with a JS bundle that clients will normally execute to hydrate that pre-rendered HTML into react components. RSCs using the app router, on the other hand, don’t have that hydration phase.
paulddraper 3y ago
> You mostly cannot just drop it in some place and then use it in other part You mostly can. In fact, I'm not aware of a major web framework that you can't.
- zdragnar 3y ago
  Ember might be the last of the old guard frameworks where this is somewhere between hard and impossible (last I looked at it anyway). Nowadays, the main libraries are designed to not totally take over the entire page, though add-on frameworks which want to be "batteries included" (i.e. Next for react) certainly will.
- andirk 3y ago
  Dropping in is the new thing now. Vue and other Javascript frameworks utilize "web components" https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_components https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_compone... which are supported all over now. You have your `<video src="someVideo.mp4">` that is part of spec, and then you have your custom element `<myVideoPlayerThing src="someVideo.mp4" fartButton="true">` that does wtf it wants under the hood but surfaces as a regular HTML DOM element.
- ozim 3y ago
  You tried doing it with 6+ developers on the team and full backlog of stuff to be implemented and you were able to explain to everyone why "this specific place" has to be different? With business on board and getting web server configuration aligned with ops to have routes and URLs.

by ozim 3y ago

kcrwfrd_ 3y ago

FWIW I've been tinkering with Astro this week and it's possible to build a website with zero client-side JavaScript. I wonder if it's possible to achieve something similar in Next.js app router if you never have a "use client" component in your tree? In any case it seems like that's the latest trend, allowing us to use full-fledged frameworks (powered by plenty of JavaScript) while minimizing (potentially down to zero) the client-side JavaScript.

solardev 3y ago
This used to be possible with the page router, and was in fact one of the big selling points (graceful degradation down to raw HTML). I'd be surprised if the app router couldn't do something similar, though admittedly I haven't tried to do that yet. Anyone with experience?
- kcrwfrd_ 3y ago
  I’m pretty sure you can’t achieve zero client-side JavaScript with pages router. You get pre-rendered HTML and it will gracefully degrade without executing JavaScript, yes…but it still comes with a JS bundle that clients will normally execute to hydrate that pre-rendered HTML into react components. RSCs using the app router, on the other hand, don’t have that hydration phase.

paulddraper 3y ago

> You mostly cannot just drop it in some place and then use it in other part You mostly can. In fact, I'm not aware of a major web framework that you can't.

zdragnar 3y ago
Ember might be the last of the old guard frameworks where this is somewhere between hard and impossible (last I looked at it anyway). Nowadays, the main libraries are designed to not totally take over the entire page, though add-on frameworks which want to be "batteries included" (i.e. Next for react) certainly will.
andirk 3y ago
Dropping in is the new thing now. Vue and other Javascript frameworks utilize "web components" https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_components https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Web_compone... which are supported all over now. You have your `<video src="someVideo.mp4">` that is part of spec, and then you have your custom element `<myVideoPlayerThing src="someVideo.mp4" fartButton="true">` that does wtf it wants under the hood but surfaces as a regular HTML DOM element.
ozim 3y ago
You tried doing it with 6+ developers on the team and full backlog of stuff to be implemented and you were able to explain to everyone why "this specific place" has to be different? With business on board and getting web server configuration aligned with ops to have routes and URLs.