74
Is jQuery still the go-to JS helper library?
(programming.dev)
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
JSX is fucking weird compared to vue
Custom template language and custom DOM attributes are way weirder than just using language-native constructs (ternary operator, map/filter, variables, functions, etc.) directly like you can in JSX.
nah mate,mixing html into js is fucked, no matter how hard you cope.
Still better than whatever the hell this is
https://vuejs.org/guide/essentials/template-syntax
The more you scroll down, the worse it gets.
And this too: https://vuejs.org/guide/essentials/list
A new separate language with features that already existed in the original language (and worked with all its tooling, etc.)
template syntax is a piece of cake, takes literally 2 hours to learn everything you need and you can easily see what's where and how the html will look when it's rendered or not.
and the list rendering? you are literally pointing out the best features of vue.
But why bother with creating a new language, and duplicating all the features your language already has, in a weird way?
If I want a list of UI items based on an array of some data, I can just do
items.map(item => 〈Item key={item.id} item={item} /〉)
, using the normalmap
function that's already part of the language.Or I can use a function, e.g.
items.map(item => renderItem(item, otherData))
etc.JSX itself is a very thin layer that translates to normal function calls.
I don't think this is a very good example. You've just said not to use a new language, then used JSX, a new language.
but how do you know what renderItem does? where will the items end up?
we are visual creatures.
if I see a I know it's doing a list item for every object in given list.
it's literally just html with a few added stuff, v-if to determine whether it's rendered, v-for for iteration, dynamic class bindings and event listener bindings.
templating has also been around for a while for a reason it's solid tech, thymeleaf and jsf/primefaces being prime examples.
Well you don't have to place it in a separate function, nothing stops you from inlining that part and writing
li
or whatever directly there.It's up to you how you organize your components.
DOM attributes are built for browsers and frameworks to take advantage of.
The style of some of those frameworks to stick symbols in there is downright weird. But that only goes against those particular frameworks. It doesn't impact how good DOM attributes actually are.
Both are weird compared to Svelte.
Svelte uses labels, so Svelte itself is weird compared to everything. Except in a way to assembly and 50s goto-control-flow styled code.
You mean these? Does it use them internally, because I haven't really seen them in any Svelte code.
If so, what does it matter what the compiler does in order to make your code work, so long as it's legal? It's perfectly valid JS, that's all that counts.
I wouldn't say Svelte is weird as much as it's different. That's the whole point after all. Instead of adding a bunch of library bloat and keeping an entire copy of the DOM to constantly compare to and derive changes from, it compiles your components down to native JS that manipulates the DOM directly, like you would by hand. Except of course the compiler uses different ways to achieve that than you would, but that's because it doesn't have to care about readability, as long as it creates valid and efficient code.