These are chat archives for ractivejs/ractive

7th
Feb 2018
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Feb 07 2018 00:01
Does that mean ractive came in as one of the smaller transfer sizes?
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Feb 07 2018 00:09
hm, maybe. As you can check my code splitted to 3 bundles (pace.js not counted because it's just a small improvement): app, vendor & manifest
app itself weighs near 7.1 KB (whole code with tempates etc)
biggest size is ractive itself
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Feb 07 2018 00:11
Yep, ractive isn't exactly light... batteries and whatnot
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Feb 07 2018 00:12
it's not such a big problem because in practice it allows to save on an application code
webpack analyser shows me:
Снимок экрана 2018-02-07 в 3.13.02.png
as you can see, biggest parts are Ractive and Marked
axios and pagejs also possible to make out
application code itself is really small part of this
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Feb 07 2018 00:20

Does that mean ractive came in as one of the smaller transfer sizes?

and also fewest lines of code, but seems this metric strongly depends on coding style and solutions which are chosen by a developer

Joseph
@fskreuz
Feb 07 2018 04:39
Monorepo coverage! :tada: https://coveralls.io/github/fskreuz/ractive-monorepo Currently misconfigured, but 86% is not too bad for a first try.
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Feb 07 2018 04:52
that's pretty impressive!
Juan C. Andreu
@andreujuanc
Feb 07 2018 12:10
Nice
@PaulMaly_twitter ractive is not listed in the link of ffreecodecamp you posted :worried:
Joseph
@fskreuz
Feb 07 2018 12:49
re: examples, I'm on @dagnelies with this one. The expected audience for examples shouldn't be "pro" developers (that's pointless, have them read the docs), but people who have absolute zero knowledge about JS. These people are people who would start coding with Sublime, an HTML page, a JS file and probably a CSS file on Chrome; jsFiddle even. These people are people who do not know what Webpack is, what node_modules even means, what Node is, what F12 does. Even the SFC format was designed to be able to edit components without fancy tooling, tehcnically, it's just another HTML file. If you know basic HTML, CSS and JS, you know Ractive.
If I remember correctly, it was mentioned somewhere that "Ractive is so simple, a designer can sit with the developer building components". A designer can build a component, even if its not their job or expertise.
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Feb 07 2018 12:51
@andreujuanc of course it's not, because project still in progress
so, maybe it's my mistake

Charts source:

I meant "original charts source"

and it were my own preliminary metrics
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Feb 07 2018 13:20

@fskreuz

re: examples, I'm on @dagnelies with this one.

Sure, I'm not in the opposite of this statement.

I think we should clearly separate "demo projects" and "real projects". For me "real project" is such project with which any developer, even the junior, faces or will face in a workplace. I don't think so, that in our days there are the real work projects without Webpack, node_modules and all that buzz words. And of course, you're right that we need to have a bunch of "demo projects" for beginners, which would describe what Ractive is and how to start working with it.
Juan C. Andreu
@andreujuanc
Feb 07 2018 15:56

Agree with @PaulMaly_twitter

Demo: Demostration => Show what it can do

Real => Real life example app

Maybe we can add

Simple => Simplified app for tutorial/learning purposes

And Starting Templates
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Feb 07 2018 19:26
@andreujuanc I'm not so strong in terminology, but I believe my idea is clear enough
I think we also need something like Svelte's REPL examples: https://svelte.technology/repl?version=1.54.1&example=hello-world
Seems this resource could be very useful : https://github.com/toddmotto/public-apis
Juan C. Andreu
@andreujuanc
Feb 07 2018 22:05
It is not terminology!
Just agreeing
I think i will make a stater template
with all stuff i use
Juan C. Andreu
@andreujuanc
Feb 07 2018 22:11
webpack , sass, stuff
and a generic routing
Joseph
@fskreuz
Feb 07 2018 22:44
Whenever "starter template" comes up in discussions, it's usually a sign that a setup is starting to become too complicated. Mention tools, and you've become opinionated.
Probably the furthest you can go without being complicated or being opinionated is a CLI that scaffolds the creation of plugins. Everything else is very situational, from routing, to pre-processing, to your choice of transpiler, and even your folder structure. That should be left to the consumer, not the library. And this is why Ractive has none of those in the docs.
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Feb 07 2018 22:47
I thinks idea with starter(s) is not so bad. Everyone have it and in multiple variations.
But I believe not all project types demands starter because basic usage of Ractive is very familiar.
Starters could be useful in more complex approaches, e.g. isomorphic, or cordova/electron apps
Chris Reeves
@evs-chris
Feb 07 2018 23:13
After having fought through some more complex setups, I agree that it certainly wouldn't hurt to have a few recipes for those sorts of thing
The danger, though, is that the ecosystem moves really fast, and having way out of date starters is not good
Joseph
@fskreuz
Feb 07 2018 23:25
Yes, that's the idea. Add in more things to maintain, leave it for 3-6 months and it's no longer viable.
And again, even if Ractive is as powerful as other frameworks, we're not backed by some big enterprise operation. :wink:
There's only one @evs-chris :smile:
Paul Maly
@PaulMaly_twitter
Feb 07 2018 23:45
I think every 3rd-party plugins/starters/etc stuff should be maintained by its creator. I suppose if Ractive won't lose a progress then developers will continue to use it in the projects and maintain their repos.