I’m in a similar boat like you. I would love for a React-like library that compiles down to direct JavaScript DOM transforms. Of course Svelte exists but I don’t want to mark what is reactive or not and I can’t go back to html templates after using typed JSX. Also I don’t really like the “island” like template syntax of Vue, Svelte, etc

▲

bytehowl 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Isn't that actually SolidJS?

https://solidjs.com

	▲	TonyPeakman 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Solid is definitely in that “compile-to-direct-DOM” camp, and I think it’s awesome — it shows how far you can push the reactive model with JSX + fine-grained updates. dagger.js is coming from the opposite direction: no compiler, no JSX, and also no signals. just plain HTML with attributes like +click / +load. You drop in a <script> from a CDN and it wires up behavior at runtime. It’s more about zero build friction and “view-source-ability”than squeezing out maximum perf. So if Solid is about compiling React-like ergonomics down to efficient DOM transforms, dagger is about skipping compilation entirely and letting you glue components together with HTML. Two very different trade-offs, but complementary ends of the spectrum.

▲

jeswin 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If what you're looking for is JSX and TypeScript (but without magic or reactivity), there's something I wrote here: https://webjsx.org

	▲	TonyPeakman 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		That's pretty cool.

▲

TonyPeakman 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Thanks for your comment. — typed JSX ergonomics are really nice, and most compile-time frameworks today make you choose between that and some sort of template DSL. However, dagger.js takes a different angle: it doesn’t try to be “React-like compiled,” it tries to be no-compile at all. State is just plain JS, DOM transforms happen directly via attributes (+click, +load, etc.), and everything is HTML you can literally view-source. So it’s not competing with React/Svelte on compile sophistication — it’s aiming to be the lightweight “glue” around whatever components you like, while keeping the HTML open and approachable.

I really hope you will try using dagger.js and come back to tell me how you feel about it. Thanks!

▲

taosx 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I also meant more advanced optimizations beyond what svelte does, like: inlining, loop unrolling, partial evaluation that would trickle down to the frameworks as well. I am aware that some of these and others are very hard to do on javascript as prepack shows.

	▲	TonyPeakman 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah, totally — once you start talking about inlining, loop unrolling, partial evaluation, you’re basically in compiler-research territory. Prepack showed both the promise and the difficulty of doing that well in JavaScript. dagger.js isn’t trying to chase those kinds of deep compile-time optimizations. Its focus is the opposite trade-off: keep things build-free, HTML-first, and easy to drop into a page. I’d rather leave the heavy lifting to whatever compiler or bundler someone pairs it with, and make sure the runtime layer stays simple and transparent. So in my mind these approaches complement each other: advanced compilers make large apps faster; Dagger tries to make small apps and prototypes friction-less.