[ryanSrich]

> migrated a 5 year old codebase from Rails to React

This statement doesn't make sense to me, and is one of the points of the article. React is a view layer. That's it. So you wouldn't migrate from Rails to React. You'd migrate Rails to React + Relay + Webpack + etc. On top of all of that you then have to decide if you're sticking with Rails for your API or if you're switching over your entire back end as well. The decision debt is just insane, and given how often these things change, that debt never goes away.

[snlacks]

It makes sense to me. The previous generations had pages that had more rendering on the server and "forms." Now, it's single page applications hitting REST end points.

So before, you had complex models, tightly bound back-end controllers, sending data to a view.

Now, you have simpler APIs on the server, you arrange and manage the data in the browser, getting more data as needed.

[dasil003]

Rails is perfectly well suited to serve an API. In fact I believe it was the first to define off the shelf RESTful conventions for an entire controller and all verbs by default back ~2007 if I recall.

http://edgeguides.rubyonrails.org/api_app.html

[AtheistOfFail]

Actually, Rails 5 implements an API mode so you can spin up a new app with only API-level conventions that runs on less memory and just serves JSON. You can add on the standard Postgres DB and Boom! "You just made Rails great again"

[dasil003]

Right, that's what I linked to ;)

[AtheistOfFail]

Oh, I didn't click that... Derp!