Agree to disagree. Building a React frontend is extremely complicated compared to server rendering HTML with progressive enhancement. It introduces state management to the frontend for even the most basic tasks, which is not something most web applications benefit from. When I built my CI/CD platform (Beaker Studio), the React portion probably added a solid 50% extra time to the project and really did nothing for it functionally.
The purpose of react was to simplify the complexities of front end web development. Just like the purpose of the DOM was to do the same thing.
Now this article is pointing to going back to the DOM for a similar purpose. The cycle on the great circle of life occurs because we are repeatedly attempting and failing to fulfill the singular purpose of building a clean API for ui construction.
The dom was a failure, react was a failure. What do you think going back to the DOM will do?
> The dom was a failure, react was a failure. What do you think going back to the DOM will do?
Facebook (rightly) said the VDOM was needed at because of rough edges around the performance of DOM implementations in assorted browsers. The DOM has improved over the past 15 years or so to the point where things like HTMX and AlpineJs are viable for more use cases. React and the DOM have not failed, they are tools that have their uses and limitations. Looking for one solution to rule them all is ultimately an exercise in futility and disappointment. Instead we should be looking at ways to integrate React and hypermedia so they interoperate more smoothly (e.g., web components or similar solutions).
No. The entire front end ecosystem is simply cruft added onto something that was fundamentally designed for something else. The "improvements" are attempts at fixing a flawed design while maintaining the old core design Similar to the cruft on top of C++.
>Looking for one solution to rule them all is ultimately an exercise in futility and disappointment
React and the dom were also exercises in futility and disappointment. They didn't seem that way at the time but as time went on it became clear what their problems were. The same thing can be said of htmx and alpine and whatever big framework that comes next.
Additionally who says their can't be one solution to rule them all? You think if your quotation eludes to some fictional story of lotr suddenly it makes sense? There is nothing in reality or logic that says we can create a design that can do better than all the apis that currently exist.
This idea that you can only male tools that do one thing well is fundamentally illogical. There are tons and tons of tools that do multiple things well. Take your car. It doesn't just get you from point a to point b. It air conditions you, it plays music... It provides safety, it gives you directions.
> The dom was a failure, react was a failure. What do you think going back to the DOM will do?
It'll give me that extra 50% effort back. Although I've used React for years, I have never been on the bandwagon. Having built many React SPAs with different teams at this point I'm confident it has always been a step backwards.
Yeah but react was designed to address a problem. I don't know if you recall but people were complaining a lot back then. There were tons of frameworks attempting to solve the issue. Only react came out in top.
By stepping back we are just going back to the same problem.
The next abstraction will attempt to solve the same problem again. Very likely in a similar way react failed, the next abstraction will introduce new issues and there will be another trend to go backwards again.
I don't have fond memories of early React; It was extremely verbose not having hooks until relatively recently, build tools were necessary but a horrible mess, and it was falsely advertised as being faster than vanilla JS. Hype around Facebook carried React. It has improved massively since then, but so has vanilla JS. I don't see a transition away from React as a step back at all. React made rendering new elements client-side and attaching events cleaner, but that was never a hard problem per se and we have web components now.
I never said a transition back from react is not an improvement. Again you're not getting it.
I'm saying we had problems with vanilla js initially and we've never moved forward. The fact that we are going back to vanilla js is reopening all the old issues are a sign that we are in stagnation.
Nothing has changed. It's a circle of attempting to improve and failing.
I dunno man, I don't consider browser APIs to be a failure. In fact, it's probably the most popular UI toolkit in existence by a wide margin. It being a collection of evolving standards doesn't count against it in my book.
Many bad things are popular. Java, C++, JavaScript. Popularity doesn't preclude something from being shit.
The front end UI isn't a collection of evolving standards. It's the same standard with more and more cruft added on top.
HTML wasn't designed for what we are doing with it now. Each additional layer... css, JavaScript, the dom, typescript, react, is a new layer over an old thing. It's like never buying a new car just modifying your old one from the 50s to stay up to date. That's why the entire front end API feels so bad. It feels disorganized with complexity that exceeds necessity.
The complexity of the spec even took years for browsers to get right. This is not a sign of good design. It's a sign of endless designs layered on top of each other all in vain effort to modernize everything and keep it backwards compatible.
There's a difference between being popular, and being the most popular thing in a category ever and keeping that title for decades with no serious challengers. The browser as we know it with the DOM is the latter. Maybe that will change with new APIs that hook into the canvas, but we're still a ways off from that and I suspect the DOM will remain in the picture even then.
