nilliams

10 ms·

31.
by nilliams 10y ago
As I explain in this comment [1], Bootstrap is modular, you shouldn't be using the whole thing. The simple answer why it is larger is because it offers far more features/components (and browser support is considerably better). [1]
32.
by nilliams 10y ago
Also a lot of the frameworks compared against are totally modular, so comparing against the full framework size doesn't really mean a lot, because it almost never makes sense to include every framework module. E.g. in Bootstrap 3 if yo
33.
by nilliams 10y ago
The lower-level abstraction (raw CSS) vs the higher level (bootstrap's grid) is more flexible. It's not simpler though, which is why the abstraction is worth learning. With a grid framework, you can make changes at a common level
34.
by nilliams 10y ago
> When are technies gonna stand up for quality of tech? When the user notices a quality difference?
35.
by nilliams 10y ago
Not sure if ironic, seems a sure bet most users won't notice and gladly prefer the "bloated" product. Yet to hear a single non-dev coworker complain about Spotify being "bloated".
36.
by nilliams 10y ago
Well they were exaggerating but I think they had a point, til recently on my Desktop machines I only cared about having a web-browser, terminal (+ Steam at home). Lately there are more UI-ish apps I value having everywhere including desktop
37.
by nilliams 10y ago
I agree you can write your Sass like that and 'do both', and I'm all for writing good Sass and building up higher level abstractions for re-use where you can. However, there's no denying the reusability of classes like &
38.
by nilliams 10y ago
You're ignoring GPPs argument though, 'basket', 'product' and 'searchResults' aren't reusable. From the POV of a dev on your team (who knows the framework), I know how to change 'pull-left',
39.
by nilliams 10y ago
I compared the output bundles (ran them back through a beautifier for sanity) and it looks like a lot of the benefit comes from the aggressive renaming. Compare this section of the rollup output: return e || (e = new zh({ enab
40.
by nilliams 10y ago
Example from the docs [1], Closure compiler can combine 'aggressive renaming', 'dead code removal' and 'function inlining', so it can compile: function unusedFunction(note) { alert(note['text&#
41.
by nilliams 10y ago
I'm not sure you read the articles GPP mentioned, yes CSS Zen Garden was the dream, but I feel like articles like the excellent mrmrs one [1] address the reality. [1] http://mrmrs.io/writing/2016/03/24&#x
42.
by nilliams 10y ago
Not really that simple. People like myself learnt CSS back in the day, and modern CSS systems like BEM, and Sass/LESS and friends, (I love Sass), yet still see the benefits of CSS-in-JS for certain kinds of 'component-based apps&#
43.
by nilliams 10y ago
It sucks that you didn't get a local PHP env working easily, but I think you're an outlier there. The ease to get up and running with PHP is widely credited as a big factor in its success. I used a thing called 'easyphp'
44.
by nilliams 10y ago
> Does this require node.js as a server? Yes > How does the page-based router deal with routes like /things/123/subthings/456? It doesn't, you have to use the programmatic router for that. > Typescript? Don
45.
by nilliams 10y ago
I don't agree, but let's break this down, comparing to a traditional app in Rails/Django that renders HTML server-side, then progressively enhances with a sprinkling of JS. > automatic code splitting By code-splitting we
46.
by nilliams 10y ago
Hmm, not quite how I'd see it. You're right to point out different considerations are required for 'process and workflows', but I think Rich's simple/easy definitions still hold up in those situations, and are
47.
by nilliams 10y ago
> That seem to go against the definition of simple: easily understood or done; presenting no difficulty. That's not a great definition of 'simple' to apply to software dev. Simple != easy, because easy is inherently about
48.
by nilliams 10y ago
Since npm 3 (about 18 months ago), the node_modules dir tree is now 'flat' and de-duped (where possible). There have always been version wildcards as far as I know. Long paths caused by the deeply nested tree were a problem in Win
49.
by nilliams 10y ago
Just answered each comment as it came, trying to defend a good submission against nonsensical snark. If you don't like sub-threads I suggest you get an HN-reader than can collapse comments.
50.
by nilliams 10y ago
We're talking about dev mindshare today. What you have installed is irrelevant.
51.
by nilliams 10y ago
It's Cocoa's problem because people stop using it for that reason. A toolkit no-one uses is a failure.
52.
by nilliams 10y ago
Building an app once for each platform is not economically viable for a lot of teams, 'serious' or otherwise.
53.
by nilliams 10y ago
But you didn't close it? So you're not even one negative datapoint. I don't think any rational dev would close a useful developer resource based on perf reasons. Again, I'm merely replying to the initial comment which wa
54.
by nilliams 10y ago
Perf is not important for a dev resource. If a dev had spent a ton of time optimising that they'd have wasted their time. Why does wasting their time make them more credible?
55.
by nilliams 10y ago
Yep wasn't suggesting it wouldn't work fine on mobile, just addressing the 'perf' criticism which to me, isn't really relevant to most devs when they would tend to use that resource on their dev machines.
56.
by nilliams 10y ago
> It's not your exact words, but I don't think it's an unfair characterization You ignored the half of the sentence following the 'or'. To me, that's unfair. > if the excuse is [...] It's not an excu
57.
by nilliams 10y ago
Fine, that wasn't the spirit of the original comment I replied to though, which was needlessly negative and lacked any awareness of context.
58.
by nilliams 10y ago
That's not what I said.
59.
by nilliams 10y ago
> I can't see how Cocoa failed at anything. Will my Cocoa app run on Windows, Linux and the web? (A well-designed web app built with Electron will). Why should any company that wants their product to be widely available invest in Co
60.
by nilliams 10y ago
> Significant enough that it comes up anytime there is a discussion on HN. That is not a useful indicator. There's a reason that 'editor-wars' is a running joke.

More ›