3 ms·

I began developing some web components without delving deeply into the mechanics of Lit and Polymer, aiming to identify gaps in the standard web components API.

I began developing some web components without delving deeply into the mechanics of Lit and Polymer, aiming to identify gaps in the standard web components API. Early on, I created several decorators and, in hindsight, they closely resemble what Lit provides. Therefore, I might concede that Lit could become a standard. However, since I haven't used it personally, I can't fully endorse it yet.

mdhb 2y ago
I think there’s a bit of a misconception for people coming from other frameworks when it comes to Lit and it’s relation to vanilla web components. It’s not like it’s “compatible” but a different thing, Lit is actually a standard web component the same way as a vanilla one might be. The only difference is that you extend a different base class instead of HTMLElement, but Lit also extends HTMLElement, they just give you a massive quality of life upgrade when it comes to boilerplate and other developer experience factors and it only costs you like 5kb. To the point that I think it’s generally a bad idea to extend HTMLElement directly. It’s very very rarely a good trade off though exceptions obviously exist. If anyone is curious to see what I mean https://lit.dev/docs/ https://lit.dev/docs/