[jbucaran]

Thanks for the comment :)

Hyperapp doesn't outperform DIO.js, but that was never the mission I embarked on with this project. You can see it benchmarked <https://rawgit.com/krausest/js-framework-benchmark/master/> among many other frameworks and you can see it's on the same ballpark as React.

The goal of this project is to minimize the concepts you need to learn to write a modern frontend app while staying on par with what other libraries can do; deliver good performance, but not at the sake of a clumsy or awkward API; reduce the boilerplate and still follow our "simplified" take on Flux or the Elm architecture if you prefer.

Hyperapp is unreservedly functional, we don't have stateful components, use `this`, classes or have more than one way to do the same thing.

We are not just about saving bytes either, but size and our brutally small code base is important for a few reasons. The idea behind the entire thing being 300 LOC is that _anyone_ can understand how everything works within a few hours. It's genuinely possible to understand not just what it does, but how it does it.

IMHO a normal person can't do that with React, or DIO, or most of the other large-ish frameworks out there. Even Preact, I found it too large for my taste. Yes, minified and gzipped is like 3.4 KB, but that translates to almost 800 LOC. It's an outstanding achievement considering it's just a fraction of React, but you are only getting React+ReactDOM.

Hyperapp is not perfect, but you are getting React+ReactDOM+Redux+ReduxThunk out of the box.

Just for a light (and harmless) comparison, this is a +/- counter in DIO.js:

    class Counter {
      getInitialState () {
        return {
          count: 0
        }
      }
      increment () {
        return {
          count: this.state.count + 1
        }
      }
      decrement () {
        return {
          count: this.state.count - 1
        }
      }
      render () {
        return [
          this.state.count,
          h('button', {onClick: this.increment}, '+'),
          h('button', {onClick: this.decrement}, '-')
        ]
      }
    }

    dio.render(Counter);

And here is the same in Hyperapp:

    app({
      state: 0,
      actions: {
        add: state => state + 1,
        sub: state => state - 1
      },
      view: (state, actions) =>
        <div>
          <button onclick={actions.add}>+</button>
          <h1>{state}</h1>
          <button onclick={actions.sub}>-</button>
        </div>
    })

[maxpert]

Thanks for your response, I totally buy the argument of stateful components (believe me I have seen worst of the worst bugs due to these issues), and bringing down time to learn concept. But 300LOC, Woah! you got my attention! I think the thing that derived React was ecosystem around it (which I think FB is going to loose pretty soon), and most libraries including DIO.js (excluding Vue.js) don't have much of it.

For the comparison example you did, don't post it anywhere officially :P because I can use babel with jsx preset (I am sure hyperapp is using too) and then do the stylish lambdas to make code look cleaner. That would be a fair comparison.

[jbucaran]

Sorry, I am sure you could use JSX with DIO.js too. To be honest, I wasn't even looking at the JSX. I grabbed it from where I found it. The takeaway is not JSX, but the fact that they use classes and that's all.

Personally, if I was going to go with this kind of architecture, I'd choose Preact (or React if I can't help it) to tap into the massive React ecosystem.