3 ms·

I use Svelte 5 (without SvelteKit) for my SPA's, after doing my first SPA in vanilla JS. Then I discovered Svelte. Svelte is very close to the platform and stil

I use Svelte 5 (without SvelteKit) for my SPA's, after doing my first SPA in vanilla JS. Then I discovered Svelte. Svelte is very close to the platform and still solves a lot of problems: for reactivity, modularity and CSS cascading (and in version 5 it is not too "magical"). A lot of the critique of frameworks in this article does not apply to Svelte.

ciconia 3mo ago
How so? Svelte provides a bunch of (very nice, no doubt) abstractions for building web UIs, and there's a build step. In that regard, Svelte is no different from other JS frameworks.
- rimliu 3mo ago
  The hint how Svelte is different is in the word "different".
- tancop 3mo ago
  [dead]
andrew-dc 3mo ago
My experience with Svelte has been similar. Svelte struck the right DX balance for me between helpful framework tools and features, but not far removed from vanilla JS, HTML, and CSS. And sure, there is a build step. I have never felt like this was a problem with Svelte, but then I don't have experience working on a colossal Svelte app. Does it become one?
dsego 3mo ago
Svelte needs a build step, and with the introduction of runes for reactive state it's not that different from the rest of the crop (solid, react, vue).