These are chat archives for ractivejs/ractive

8th
Aug 2017
Joseph
@fskreuz
Aug 08 2017 14:54
Random question of the day (because it's very quiet): iirc, Ractive re-renders based on a full tree while diff-style VDOM re-renders based on a new tree every time. Any pros/cons to each?
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Aug 08 2017 15:05
I really haven't done much comparison between the low level mechanisms in, say, react. My understanding is that it's a bit simpler, but does it handle all of the whacky corner cases with changing select options around and changes around inputs, for instance?
Joseph
@fskreuz
Aug 08 2017 15:07
oh yeah, there's that.
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Aug 08 2017 15:14
I'd imagine that since hiring Dominic Gannaway, react's DOM manipulation code has gotten crazy optimized.
I still think there's a lot to having templates as data, and thus prefer Ractive's approach to building vdom off the set and keeping it in sync at that level
Joseph
@fskreuz
Aug 08 2017 15:18
Facebook hired the inferno dude? I'm so behind in news. :grin:
Yeah, I still think templates are still good. JSX and a build step is still overkill for most of the things I do.
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Aug 08 2017 15:27
I'm starting to see some distinction between libraries being designed for websites vs for webapps. For instance, I don't think you can get much better than svelte for lightweight general web-facing stuff. For much more complex apps though, you start to hit a wall with what's possible without gaining weight pretty fast.
The first libraries that came out didn't make a direct distinction, though I feel like angular definitely is aimed at apps.
All the super lightweight libs that are popping up now seem to be targeting less app-y environments.
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Aug 08 2017 15:32
I don't know that that has much bearing on dom sync algos in practice, but it seems to, at least superficially.
Joseph
@fskreuz
Aug 08 2017 15:35

I'm starting to see some distinction between libraries being designed for websites vs for webapps.

That distinction is actually great (to me at least). It becomes complicated when that line blurs.

For instance, wanting to develop ala components (small, reusable, app-like compile-y stuff) but still thinking in terms of traditional pages, one ends up having monolithic, page-like components. :D
Or the other way around (building a website, treating it like a webapp) and you end up with an unnecessarily complex build step. :D
(feels like an aside, but related. whatevs. throwing idea out.) :grin:
Joseph
@fskreuz
Aug 08 2017 15:41
So how do you treat Ractive? For apps? Websites? Both?
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Aug 08 2017 15:49
Both, but most of my business is in the app area. Strangely, my biggest existing codebase is a cms that uses ractive on both sides - designers define 'components' (template + script + style + user config, not ractive components), which they or end users can assemble into pages. That could really be done with any lib, but ractive is extremely designer friendly.
We're also migrating a bunch legacy desktop apps into the interwebs era, and that's where the webapp-friendly facets of ractive are super handy. For instance, a deep data model with binding all the way down fits graphs of business objects beautifully.
How about you?
Joseph
@fskreuz
Aug 08 2017 15:58
Mostly in the app arena. Usually use Ractive to do quick proof of concepts about components (reuse, portability, data management, styling, how to do a workflow) because it can do almost anything and without a build step (or at least only needs bundling). Projects are usually Angular tho because it's the Java for webapps. :D
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Aug 08 2017 16:01
Hah! I must say I don't miss Java 😁. Scala... every now and then...
Joseph
@fskreuz
Aug 08 2017 16:02
:D
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Aug 08 2017 16:06
I'm still not sure what's going to take over computationally intensive backends for us: .net core, rust, or maybe kotlin. If MS commits hard to .net core it could be pretty good. Hopefully they won't take their usual approach of decent ideas followed by a Molotov cocktail in a dumpster. What sorts of backends do you use?
Joseph
@fskreuz
Aug 08 2017 16:17
Fair mix of Drupal and Angular+Spring (hence the website vs webapp views). The PHP side is where I can drop in Ractive fairly easily. The Angular side is where Ractive becomes the PoC of things.
I like PHP better than Java tho. Less... brutal. :D
Personally, I use Node. Easiest to get, write, and break. :D
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Aug 08 2017 17:52
Node definitely has a short spin up advantage. You have to watch your modules, though. There's a pretty extensive ecosystem, but I prefer modules with very minimal deps and still get bitten occasionally. PHP has improved vastly in the years since I last used it 😁.