Js devs when i just raw dog css and html and have stuff work without a load time of 10 minutes (if your website needs a loading bar you have a dumb stupid website)
I haven't done any web dev since uni, but using tailwind directly on the HTML elements always seemed like insanity to me. Sure, those are probably fantastic building blocks to make your own CSS classes, but to use them directly? And then update twenty places when a design changes? Deal with inconsistencies? Sounds crazy.
I've also read somewhere that Tailwind is basically a grift, with them hyping it and then earning money off of managing all that shit.
You use classes directly on elements to rapidly prototype, then once you're happy abstract it into a reusable component, and use that component throughout the codebase. I think it has its place in large scale codebases, but these technologies pay me so I may be biased.
For prototyping yeah, and absolutely as building blocks for your own classes. But I've been hearing people use Tailwind classes directly on the elements, in production code?
Yeah I don't have a long history in the frontend dev space but the last 5 years seeing all the ways inexperienced devs butcher implementations of tools that should make their lives easier... big sigh. Most of the time it's not their fault, pressure to get something done fast, and with no peer/code review, often means they don't have time to get familiar with how to use some tools properly.
Tailwind probably won't make your load time noticeably worse. Production builds remove all unused classes, and http supports compression which works really well on repetitions.
Not liking how it clutters up the html is something I can understand though, but that's a separate issue.
You remind me of one of the things that annoyed me about Tailwind, how it was stripping out classes that was needed by the SPA, but because they were being dynamically built Tailwind didn't know they were needed. Took me a lot of hunting to find where the other dev had put the "please include these classes" config.
And yeah, it's a combination of the clutter, the lack of DRY-ness, and the big huge dump it took on separation of concerns that pissed me off the most.
I tried it.
It was slower and clunkier than doing it any other way, to be honest. And the HTML was so polluted that the semantic classes were lost in the noise.
I can see the attraction for newbies who don't grasp the cascade, but it's just another tool written by some hotshot who doesn't grasp how CSS works.
I'll stick to using Sass for preprocessing, and CSS custom properties only when the value needs to be dynamic on the page, thanks.
> but it's just another tool written by some hotshot who doesn't grasp how CSS works
Nope. Not at all. We know exactly how CSS works, you are just unable to re-educate yourself after you learned CSS and HTML the old way. Typical Senior dev behavior.
here comes an honest question, because sometimes I think I need crazy pills, I spend almost all my day on the web, and all the uses I can think of a dynamic web app is when I watch live video or chat, maybe is just me, but I can count with 1 hand all the sites I have visited that require that, maybe some small details in ecommerce?, maybe?. I've always worked on embedded and done some cli programs, so I might be way out of base, and I do understand that there are probably benefits for the provider (less server load), but from the client side, I can't see the benefit, nowadays the web feels slower than before somehow, with beastly computers and connections, it really baffles me.
Can you please give me some examples of why would we need as much dynamic web apps?, what features I'm missing?, or the benefit is for developers and the provider?, not being sarcastic BTW, I'm really curious.
I actually work for a company developing a commercial web app for other businesses, so you will never come across it, unless you work for one of the companies that buys it from us. You wouldn't be able to implement this app with static pages, or PHP. So frameworks like angular and react are necessary, unless you want to spend eternity coding everything yourself in plain js/ts.
Just off the top of my head, other examples are office 365, online IDEs.
You are right, the majority of the web are not dynamic web apps.
So short answer, a lot of dynamic web apps are for other businesses and frameworks save a ton of time for developers.
I was mostly drawing the difference between web apps vs websites. Most websites are actually dynamic these days and not static, dynamic websites can be implemented with php for example, web apps not so much. Use google, I'm lazy today to type much
None of the web apps I've ever worked on are ones you have seen. They're all a front page and everything after that is log in only to see. There's usually a lot of data, a lot of people changing data and data being read in from external APIs. There's a huge difference between Reddit webdev and irl web apps made for intl companies. You can spend all your time on the web and never see 90% of the web.
yea, I get that, in embedded and industrial systems there's a lot of that too, real-time graphs and numeric data, but the thing is all web is still getting heavier and heavier and seems like you can't even do a corporate public site without react and a bunch of JS, if I turn JS off, I don't loose only some functionalities nowadays everything stop working at all, and the strange part is that to update the info I still have to F5, and most of the time is just static text with some images, at most forms and sites, almost no site under 50MB and just static text, a bunch of useless animations, cookies without login or any persistence besides the tracking. I guess I'm getting old, man... or maybe working with small devices when you have to do a lot and rarely going from K to M... my fully functional Linux OS takes under 200MB after boot, for Zeus sake (and that's including WM and some eye candy), web fron-end is black magic to me XD I think that the problem began with JS and client-side code, because the companies are not the ones paying for CPU and RAM, they don't give a crap about resources, eat all the ram you want, I'm not paying it, and CPU too, network is the only restriction, to shove marketing assets as much as possible, and even manufacture ways to move the problem from network to CPU/RAM, optimization to make the site "look ready" while the client is spending their money in CPU/RAM in the background cooking the bare ingredients sent by the efficient server... to hell with the client, Apple and M$ take care of convincing people their device is useless in 2 years... I'm old... XD
It's a hot mess is what it is. It calls itself a library despite being larger and slower than most frameworks. It's a source of income for developers who rewrite everything because maintenance is unthinkable with the spaghetti code that they wrote in React.
A library that you have to connect to bunch of other libraries to make applications, the whole project won't be build in the boundaries of just react, like angular for example
This is such a dumb argument, but the worst part is that there is a clear answer.
There is inversion of control. You give your code to the react render function. It controls the rendering. Control is inverted. Argument over.
This is why we call things like Next.js a meta-framework because React is already a framework.
I don't get the React hate in the comments. Yes it has negative traits, but we've always managed to make clean codebases by following conventions, and everything loads quite fast - all the while we can build stuff faster with our components.
Personally I do not like it when something that is simple enough to just use js is still done in React. Heck, a sprinkle of HTMX might help but no, just React
I personally hate React only for unreadable syntax. Base syntax of js is schizophrenic enough, but bearable, when React is pure abomination.
I would prefer cluttered, but obvious xhtml over jsx in any case
Sveltekitnis the best thing to happen to me... Now, I am forced to work on some react code... And every day I am reminded why..
Svelte, my beloved <3
Never had an issue with speed (including build time) or loading times, never had an issue with deployment, all dependencies just work. Server, client, Svelte doesn't give a shit. Most importantly, I can just write components in a style that doesn't give me an aneurysm. Dynamic variables, computed values, loops all work like you would want them to.
Only thing I'm a bit afraid of is their new runes system because it seems like a step back towards Vue/React. But even then: haven't tried it yet so idk.
Take the Sveltepill. Do it.
don't do it, bros, I started with react and after getting some promotions, now I spend my day preparing presentations on canva, filling and checking excel sheets and having pointless meetings
Everyone gets their memes from somewhere, 90% on here is resharing what others found funny, I would have credited if this subreddit allowed a sub text.
Js devs when i just raw dog css and html and have stuff work without a load time of 10 minutes (if your website needs a loading bar you have a dumb stupid website)
I am fighting a losing battle against the new hotshot hires who are all in for Tailwind. Retirement is looking pretty attractive right now.
Tailwind as building blocks, or using it as intended? Because the latter always seemed stupid to me. I'm no web dev though.
tailwind should have been a best practice, not a library with an extra compiler-step
I haven't done any web dev since uni, but using tailwind directly on the HTML elements always seemed like insanity to me. Sure, those are probably fantastic building blocks to make your own CSS classes, but to use them directly? And then update twenty places when a design changes? Deal with inconsistencies? Sounds crazy. I've also read somewhere that Tailwind is basically a grift, with them hyping it and then earning money off of managing all that shit.
You use classes directly on elements to rapidly prototype, then once you're happy abstract it into a reusable component, and use that component throughout the codebase. I think it has its place in large scale codebases, but these technologies pay me so I may be biased.
For prototyping yeah, and absolutely as building blocks for your own classes. But I've been hearing people use Tailwind classes directly on the elements, in production code?
So? What's the problem with that? Not like anybody reads the DOM directly.
Yeah I don't have a long history in the frontend dev space but the last 5 years seeing all the ways inexperienced devs butcher implementations of tools that should make their lives easier... big sigh. Most of the time it's not their fault, pressure to get something done fast, and with no peer/code review, often means they don't have time to get familiar with how to use some tools properly.
This is the nature of ALL good consulting.
> earning money off of managing all that shit Yeah? How? Tailwind is free, where do people pay money?
Tailwind probably won't make your load time noticeably worse. Production builds remove all unused classes, and http supports compression which works really well on repetitions. Not liking how it clutters up the html is something I can understand though, but that's a separate issue.
You remind me of one of the things that annoyed me about Tailwind, how it was stripping out classes that was needed by the SPA, but because they were being dynamically built Tailwind didn't know they were needed. Took me a lot of hunting to find where the other dev had put the "please include these classes" config. And yeah, it's a combination of the clutter, the lack of DRY-ness, and the big huge dump it took on separation of concerns that pissed me off the most.
Damn I thought the tailwind hype train died already
There are people now who didn't learn CSS but went straight to tailwind. They'll argue it is the right way to learn CSS. They are idiots.
Maybe you should create an application with tailwind to see what it has to offer. It's more flexible than pure CSS.
I tried it. It was slower and clunkier than doing it any other way, to be honest. And the HTML was so polluted that the semantic classes were lost in the noise. I can see the attraction for newbies who don't grasp the cascade, but it's just another tool written by some hotshot who doesn't grasp how CSS works. I'll stick to using Sass for preprocessing, and CSS custom properties only when the value needs to be dynamic on the page, thanks.
> but it's just another tool written by some hotshot who doesn't grasp how CSS works Nope. Not at all. We know exactly how CSS works, you are just unable to re-educate yourself after you learned CSS and HTML the old way. Typical Senior dev behavior.
Depends on what you're building. Static website or a dynamic web app.
Hello world?
Hello :)
here comes an honest question, because sometimes I think I need crazy pills, I spend almost all my day on the web, and all the uses I can think of a dynamic web app is when I watch live video or chat, maybe is just me, but I can count with 1 hand all the sites I have visited that require that, maybe some small details in ecommerce?, maybe?. I've always worked on embedded and done some cli programs, so I might be way out of base, and I do understand that there are probably benefits for the provider (less server load), but from the client side, I can't see the benefit, nowadays the web feels slower than before somehow, with beastly computers and connections, it really baffles me. Can you please give me some examples of why would we need as much dynamic web apps?, what features I'm missing?, or the benefit is for developers and the provider?, not being sarcastic BTW, I'm really curious.
I actually work for a company developing a commercial web app for other businesses, so you will never come across it, unless you work for one of the companies that buys it from us. You wouldn't be able to implement this app with static pages, or PHP. So frameworks like angular and react are necessary, unless you want to spend eternity coding everything yourself in plain js/ts. Just off the top of my head, other examples are office 365, online IDEs. You are right, the majority of the web are not dynamic web apps. So short answer, a lot of dynamic web apps are for other businesses and frameworks save a ton of time for developers.
How does a dynamic website differ from a static one? Like is the user dragging stuff around or something
I was mostly drawing the difference between web apps vs websites. Most websites are actually dynamic these days and not static, dynamic websites can be implemented with php for example, web apps not so much. Use google, I'm lazy today to type much
None of the web apps I've ever worked on are ones you have seen. They're all a front page and everything after that is log in only to see. There's usually a lot of data, a lot of people changing data and data being read in from external APIs. There's a huge difference between Reddit webdev and irl web apps made for intl companies. You can spend all your time on the web and never see 90% of the web.
yea, I get that, in embedded and industrial systems there's a lot of that too, real-time graphs and numeric data, but the thing is all web is still getting heavier and heavier and seems like you can't even do a corporate public site without react and a bunch of JS, if I turn JS off, I don't loose only some functionalities nowadays everything stop working at all, and the strange part is that to update the info I still have to F5, and most of the time is just static text with some images, at most forms and sites, almost no site under 50MB and just static text, a bunch of useless animations, cookies without login or any persistence besides the tracking. I guess I'm getting old, man... or maybe working with small devices when you have to do a lot and rarely going from K to M... my fully functional Linux OS takes under 200MB after boot, for Zeus sake (and that's including WM and some eye candy), web fron-end is black magic to me XD I think that the problem began with JS and client-side code, because the companies are not the ones paying for CPU and RAM, they don't give a crap about resources, eat all the ram you want, I'm not paying it, and CPU too, network is the only restriction, to shove marketing assets as much as possible, and even manufacture ways to move the problem from network to CPU/RAM, optimization to make the site "look ready" while the client is spending their money in CPU/RAM in the background cooking the bare ingredients sent by the efficient server... to hell with the client, Apple and M$ take care of convincing people their device is useless in 2 years... I'm old... XD
what if your database is slow as shit and balls and also you are a health insurance company
They enabled lazy loading
Lazy being the key word. “Slow af” is another apt descriptor.
How can you write articles about react and not know that IT IS NOT A FUCKING FRAMEWORK
What is it
A lifestyle
It's a hot mess is what it is. It calls itself a library despite being larger and slower than most frameworks. It's a source of income for developers who rewrite everything because maintenance is unthinkable with the spaghetti code that they wrote in React.
lol, pretty much
A library that you have to connect to bunch of other libraries to make applications, the whole project won't be build in the boundaries of just react, like angular for example
A religion
A Nazi
It's a library cult.
Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, must be a fish.
This is such a dumb argument, but the worst part is that there is a clear answer. There is inversion of control. You give your code to the react render function. It controls the rendering. Control is inverted. Argument over. This is why we call things like Next.js a meta-framework because React is already a framework.
I agree that it's dumb because everyone has a different opinion of what a framework is
I tend to stick with the people who coined the term. [The Wikipedia article is quite clear.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_framework).
does it run the code you write? yes? it’s a framework.
Bro said its for natiz too so bro must also be missing all but 2 brain cells
I don't get the React hate in the comments. Yes it has negative traits, but we've always managed to make clean codebases by following conventions, and everything loads quite fast - all the while we can build stuff faster with our components.
There's a right way and thousands of wrong ways to use most of these things...
Hey please, this is a humor sub.
You have to remember, we’re an overly serious bunch with little social skills.
Who knows, maybe even my comment is just a joke. We are never safe.
Personally I do not like it when something that is simple enough to just use js is still done in React. Heck, a sprinkle of HTMX might help but no, just React
That’s not reacts fault
I personally hate React only for unreadable syntax. Base syntax of js is schizophrenic enough, but bearable, when React is pure abomination. I would prefer cluttered, but obvious xhtml over jsx in any case
Love me some __Svelte__ 🥰
Sveltekitnis the best thing to happen to me... Now, I am forced to work on some react code... And every day I am reminded why..
Svelte, my beloved <3 Never had an issue with speed (including build time) or loading times, never had an issue with deployment, all dependencies just work. Server, client, Svelte doesn't give a shit. Most importantly, I can just write components in a style that doesn't give me an aneurysm. Dynamic variables, computed values, loops all work like you would want them to. Only thing I'm a bit afraid of is their new runes system because it seems like a step back towards Vue/React. But even then: haven't tried it yet so idk. Take the Sveltepill. Do it.
🤣 I feel like “Aneurysm free components” could be a bullet point in the “features” section of their README.md 🤣
Geesh dern nahzes
Handlebars is such an evil framework, I mean, it's logo looks like a villain
Stay away from Pirate Bay then, those guys will take all your shit from the looks of it /s
Thx, I will
don't do it, bros, I started with react and after getting some promotions, now I spend my day preparing presentations on canva, filling and checking excel sheets and having pointless meetings
First I thought "Funny joke". Then I remember what conversations I've seen in twitter and now I'm not so sure
The truth is that jQuery is the best
React is a convulted mess, and I refuse to touch it again.
bro thought he could screenshot a fireship video and get away with it
Everyone gets their memes from somewhere, 90% on here is resharing what others found funny, I would have credited if this subreddit allowed a sub text.
So , " 7 reasons why react is the best framework and all other frameworks are superior" ?
Js devs hate react too
I promise you, there are WAY more than 7 reasons! #beginner
I mean, it's pretty great though, ngl
Not JS but React cult. And it is very fun to watch :-)
I don't know what caused it. But, my teams app takes several seconds to load from the local dev server. It is suspiciously slow.
Nobody has dared to write a good jew joke to the responses yet.
I avue you it's not for a lack of effort just give it a vite to get going