3 ms·

Why not use React for that? If I use React for everything then I don’t have to decide, I don’t have to use two different tools. Consistency is fantastic, if you

Why not use React for that? If I use React for everything then I don’t have to decide, I don’t have to use two different tools. Consistency is fantastic, if you only use nails then you only need to carry a hammer. Why use two incompatible languages (JSX and HTML) for different types of web pages, when you could just always use JSX? React can statically render to HTML if your page is really static. I think what you’re really complaining about is that people use React for static content and don’t statically render it first. That is sloppy, I agree. But it’s not React itself that’s the problem but rather the developers who don’t care what they are doing.

MrJohz 1y ago
In theory, you can completely statically render everything. In practice, every static site I've seen built with React also uses dynamic client-side components, either as a prerendering mechanism, or because there are dynamic toggles and things on the site that are easiest to build as React components. This usually means that a lot of excess Javascript gets loaded on the client that isn't usually necessary. The islands/RSC work seems to offer some improvements to this, but most of these websites still include a full copy of React on the page to essentially do what the speculation rules API and a `<dialog>` element could do just as easily.
emseetech 1y ago
HTML will be around long after React is dead. What guarantee does a React codebase have that its toolchain will still work in 5 years? We've seen build tools come and go, whole approaches deprecated. What if a security update requires upgrading to a non-compatible version of React, therefore necessitating a considerable refactor? Meanwhile, the original Space Jam website still renders perfectly. The standards are superior to the frameworks built on top of them. Abstractions come and go, but web standards, once adopted, have a solid track record of sticking around.

MrJohz 1y ago

In theory, you can completely statically render everything. In practice, every static site I've seen built with React also uses dynamic client-side components, either as a prerendering mechanism, or because there are dynamic toggles and things on the site that are easiest to build as React components. This usually means that a lot of excess Javascript gets loaded on the client that isn't usually necessary. The islands/RSC work seems to offer some improvements to this, but most of these websites still include a full copy of React on the page to essentially do what the speculation rules API and a `<dialog>` element could do just as easily.

emseetech 1y ago

HTML will be around long after React is dead. What guarantee does a React codebase have that its toolchain will still work in 5 years? We've seen build tools come and go, whole approaches deprecated. What if a security update requires upgrading to a non-compatible version of React, therefore necessitating a considerable refactor? Meanwhile, the original Space Jam website still renders perfectly. The standards are superior to the frameworks built on top of them. Abstractions come and go, but web standards, once adopted, have a solid track record of sticking around.