|
| ▲ | drawfloat 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Vercel has slowly taken over Facebook's position as being the employer of the main developers of React. There's a debate to be had over how much they 'control' it or not, but the fact create-next-app is the first recommended option on the official installation page now does show it's had an impact. 5 or so years ago, Next was a pretty solid option to quickly build up a non SPA, when combined with the static export function. It wasn't ideal, but it worked and came batteries included. Over time it's become more bloated, more complicated, and focused on features that benefit from Vercel's hosting – and static builds can't take advantage of them. These newer features seem of limited benefit, to me, for even SPAs. Why is there still not a first class way of referencing API routes in the client code that provides typing? Once you reach even medium scale, it becomes a mess of inteprolated string paths and manually added shared response types. |
| |
| ▲ | robertlagrant 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm trying to build a nextjs app and it's quite painful. It seems to be more and more focused on SSR, which I don't care about (looking for a static app that calls separate API endpoints). That would have been fine in the NextJS I remember from a few years ago, where static and SSR seemed equally viable, but I can't be bothered now. I'm going to try Tanstack Start. | |
| ▲ | mexicocitinluez 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > but the fact create-next-app is the first recommended option on the official installation page now does show it's had an impact. There is a decent bit of history around that page and whether some things should go in a collapsible div and whether that was prioritizing certain frameworks over other ones. One thing I'm still salty about is that CRA isn't mentioned anywhere (in the entire site). It's like it never existed. |
|
|
| ▲ | flowerbreeze 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I'm being rather snarky here, but the main point of front-end JS UI frameworks is to exist and to survive in their environment. For this purpose they have evolved to form a parasymbiotic relationship with others in their environment, for example with influencers. The frameworks with the best influencers win out over older ones that do not have the novelty value anymore and fail to attract the best influencers. |
| |
| ▲ | Griffinsauce 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | This could also apply to the recent wave of hate towards Next. | | |
| ▲ | christophilus 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Next is the Microsoft Sharepoint of the JavaScript world. It’s a terrible solution to just about anything, and yet gets crammed into places and forced on people due to marketing-led decision making. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | azangru 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Are people using react for non-SPA’s? Imagine a page that loads html during the first load, and then performs client-side routing during subsequent navigations. Is it an SPA? Is it not an SPA? |
|
| ▲ | codetantra 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| After Tanstack Start, Next.js seems even less intuitive. While it remains a viable option due to its established momentum, it feels quite alien to backend devs, esp with its unconventional defaults. |
| |
| ▲ | CalRobert 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | It feels like Wordpress inasmuch as it’s shoving a tool in places that don’t make sense. React is great for SPAs but if I wanted pre-rendered static content I’d use a different tool. | | |
| ▲ | codetantra 17 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | If you are dealing with a static site then Astro makes more sense. Renders to just plain HTML while still allowing you to provide interactivity for part of page components using React or any framework by creating what Astro calls an island.
You get best of both worlds, rich interactiveness by using JS and plain HTML/CSS where you need static. | |
| ▲ | patates 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I had had a client cancel a job when they heard it's not going to use Wordpress. It was going to be a dashboard showing statistics (air quality, room bookings etc.) from their facility. | |
| ▲ | davidodio 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | why? jsx is a great language for templating, the ui being a function of state is an incredible model. i am not a huge nextjs fan but React, mdx and friends are great for pre-rendered static content | | |
| ▲ | skydhash 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Isn’t all templates language that way (blade, jade,…)? The main selling point of JSX is being a DSL for React, which present a functional model instead of the imperative paradigm of the DOM API. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | gnarlbar 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Not me, but I can imagine it happening. JSX is a nice server side templating language. There a lot of people who aren't dependency conscious, and a lot of people who love react, and there is quite a bit of overlap in those two groups. I've used bun + preact_render_to_string for server side JSX templates before and it was nice. When I did it seemed that bun somewhat embraced react, and I could imagine react being the path of least resistance to server-side JSX there for some of the folks in the aforementioned groups. |
|
| ▲ | pjmlp 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The point is JavaScript developers rediscovering PHP, Spring MVC, ASP.NET MVC, Rails,..... And to sell Vercel on top. |
|
| ▲ | user34283 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Instead of going: Fetch index.html -> Fetch JS bundle -> Evaluate -> Fetch /users/me You do: Fetch index.html (your page is rendered at this point) -> rehydrate with client side JS for interactivity in the background It's a pretty smart solution I think, and many people are still sleeping on the whole SSR topic. |
| |
| ▲ | anon7000 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | It makes sense for sites with a lot of static pages, but you barely need react in that case. NextJS does not perform that well out of the box. I’d argue that a basic SPA with no SSR using something like preact would be a better choice for many building dashboards or applications (not marketing/docs sites). It’s also easier to host & operate and has fewer footguns. Getting SSR right is tricky and barely even matters for a lot of use cases I’m seeing with Next. Better server/client integration when it comes to rendering UIs is neat, but there are other technologies that solve for that at a more fundamental level (htmx, phoenix) | | |
| ▲ | user34283 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | It rather appears to make sense for any site that currently makes additional requests to fetch data as part of the page load. It is broadly useful and relatively easy to use while still staying within the React framework the developer knows well. That said, I didn't build more than a demo app with NextJS, so I don't know a lot about possible issues. Just the concept seems to be good. |
|
|
