Don’t build that app! – Luke Jackson - YouTube
This is a fascinating look at how you can get the benefits of React and npm without using React and npm.
Here’s an accompanying article on the same topic.
This is a fascinating look at how you can get the benefits of React and npm without using React and npm.
Here’s an accompanying article on the same topic.
The context here is JavaScript, not apples or olives.
This is yet another great explainer from Ire. Tree shaking is one of those things that I thought I understood, but always had the nagging doubt that I was missing something. This article really helped clear things up for me.
Dave explains how Jekyll Includes are starting to convert him to web components. The encapsulation is nice and neat. And he answers the inevitable “but why not use React?” question:
Writing HTML that contains JavaScript, not JavaScript that contains HTML, feels good to me.
The key feature for me is that this approach doesn’t have to depend on JavaScript in the browser:
I like that Web Components are an entirely client-side technology but can be rendered server-side in existing tech stacks whether it’s Jekyll, Rails, or even some Enterprise Java system.
A really great introduction to web components by Monica. But I couldn’t help but be disheartened by this:
Web components tend to have dependencies on other web components, so you need a package manager to herd all them cats.
For me, this kind of interdependence lessens the standalone nature of web components—it just doesn’t feel quite so encapsulated to me. I know that this can be solved with build tools, but now you’ve got two problems (and one more dependency).