5 ms·

you don't need to send 100kb+ of JS over the wire to build a static site in react: for example https://vike.dev https://vike.dev supports static HTML-only outpu

you don't need to send 100kb+ of JS over the wire to build a static site in react: for example https://vike.dev https://vike.dev supports static HTML-only output for a site built with React. as for "why React", speaking just for myself it's really nice to just have one tool that can do everything (static HTML-only, static with JS, SPA, SSR) and not have to context switch or potentially even have to split my site into two projects just because I want to hop between one or the other approach. and React has the biggest mindshare and ecosystem.

owebmaster 1y ago
> you don't need to send 100kb+ of JS over the wire to build a static site in react It is telling that the blog of the fw creator ships 500kb of JS/CSS/HTML to display text on a screen. > it's really nice to just have one tool that can do everything (static HTML-only, static with JS, SPA, SSR) WebComponents (+lit-html)
- perilunar 1y ago
  Yep. 411 KB of JS (126 KB minified). 525 KB of fonts! 40KB of HTML. 1.1MB (704 KB minified) total for approximately 4.3 KB of actual text. That's a crap:content ratio of 256:1
  - azemetre 1y ago
    Wow this is a great metric to use.
  - danabramov 1y ago
    Disable JS and see that my site loads just fine. Fonts are nice-to-have. Interactive examples (on other pages) are nice-to-have. None of this is render-blocking.
    - perilunar 1y ago
      It's still half a megabyte with JS turned off. For page of text. With no images.
- danabramov 1y ago
  Pretty much none of that is blocking first paint. Disable JS and see that my site works just fine. I have interactive examples on some pages but all the extra stuff is just “nice-to-have”. Also I’m not a framework creator.
turtlebits 1y ago
I think you just proved the point by introducing yet another frontend framework to learn. And you absolutely don't want one tool to do everything. HTML/CSS is native and understanding it is a requirement for React. It also doesn't require Node and a build step.
- nsonha 1y ago
  I think all software engineers in the world who know HTML/CSS (like who doesn't?) beg to differ Really funny how some devs think they know the secrets of engineering simplicity and everyone else is a fool for not knowing what they know (HTML/CSS).
  - owebmaster 1y ago
    Read this thread. There are some comments about using React components for everything and never touching HTML tags and CSS. And they probably call themselves senior frontend engineers.
    - nsonha 1y ago
      If not React it's just another abstraction (including whatever you come up with) that is arbitrary and shitty in a different way. Front-end/mobile is so boring and unimportant that it absolutely makes sense to just pick a thing and use it everywhere, and save your brain capacity for interesting problem solving. I say this as someone who's been doing front end for 10 years.
      - owebmaster 1y ago
        If frontend is boring and unimportant, what is exciting and important? saving records in a database? UX is what makes money and it is done through frontend.
        nsonha 1y ago
        Client side is only interesting in complex generic reactive programming problems, state machines, domain modeling in the client, local first patterns. The part about browser or mobile platform intricacies is very lame.

owebmaster 1y ago

> you don't need to send 100kb+ of JS over the wire to build a static site in react It is telling that the blog of the fw creator ships 500kb of JS/CSS/HTML to display text on a screen. > it's really nice to just have one tool that can do everything (static HTML-only, static with JS, SPA, SSR) WebComponents (+lit-html)

perilunar 1y ago
Yep. 411 KB of JS (126 KB minified). 525 KB of fonts! 40KB of HTML. 1.1MB (704 KB minified) total for approximately 4.3 KB of actual text. That's a crap:content ratio of 256:1
- azemetre 1y ago
  Wow this is a great metric to use.
- danabramov 1y ago
  Disable JS and see that my site loads just fine. Fonts are nice-to-have. Interactive examples (on other pages) are nice-to-have. None of this is render-blocking.
  - perilunar 1y ago
    It's still half a megabyte with JS turned off. For page of text. With no images.
danabramov 1y ago
Pretty much none of that is blocking first paint. Disable JS and see that my site works just fine. I have interactive examples on some pages but all the extra stuff is just “nice-to-have”. Also I’m not a framework creator.

turtlebits 1y ago

I think you just proved the point by introducing yet another frontend framework to learn. And you absolutely don't want one tool to do everything. HTML/CSS is native and understanding it is a requirement for React. It also doesn't require Node and a build step.

nsonha 1y ago
I think all software engineers in the world who know HTML/CSS (like who doesn't?) beg to differ Really funny how some devs think they know the secrets of engineering simplicity and everyone else is a fool for not knowing what they know (HTML/CSS).
- owebmaster 1y ago
  Read this thread. There are some comments about using React components for everything and never touching HTML tags and CSS. And they probably call themselves senior frontend engineers.
  - nsonha 1y ago
    If not React it's just another abstraction (including whatever you come up with) that is arbitrary and shitty in a different way. Front-end/mobile is so boring and unimportant that it absolutely makes sense to just pick a thing and use it everywhere, and save your brain capacity for interesting problem solving. I say this as someone who's been doing front end for 10 years.
    - owebmaster 1y ago
      If frontend is boring and unimportant, what is exciting and important? saving records in a database? UX is what makes money and it is done through frontend.
      - nsonha 1y ago
        Client side is only interesting in complex generic reactive programming problems, state machines, domain modeling in the client, local first patterns. The part about browser or mobile platform intricacies is very lame.