4 ms·
It only became obvious at the end that the whole (WAY too long) article was just a giant troll to promote the author's personal pet technology (HTMLX). But it
by hungryhobbit 1y ago
It only became obvious at the end that the whole (WAY too long) article was just a giant troll to promote the author's personal pet technology (HTMLX). But it was a highly disingenuous one, because (as the poster above noted) it was giant straw man, not a legit critique.
I felt cheated just by having read the article: I'm all for a long and winding article that has something to say, but this one was telling a bad joke for WAY, WAY too many paragraphs.
- rs186 1y agoThe article does not go into the disadvantages of server-side rendering (or more specifically, fetching html from server). I am sure the author is well aware of the choice between client- and server-side rendering but skipped it and seems to present technology like htmlx as “solutions" to all the problems the article mentioned which is quite a stretch.