[samsaccone]

Hi could you post some before and after traces (chrome dev tools recordings) of the site. Performance is nuanced, and the original tweet only helps to put down others (the react team) unfairly.

I think the win here is less about react and more about not running as much javascript on the client. I hypothesize that the traces will show this, but it is impossible to know for sure without them :)

Thanks in advance!

[atomicUpdate]

> the original tweet only helps to put down others (the react team) unfairly.

There was nothing personal or malicious in that slide at all. Do we need a safe space to talk about performance metrics now?

[0xCMP]

Let’s say you think it’s not React or you have time to improve React to solve that problem: wouldn’t having some data help test that assertion and make changes?

[atomicUpdate]

We have the data: they removed React and performance increased by 50%.

Why should any more work be put into keeping React or improving it if their solution of removing it entirely already works?

[0xCMP]

Well, for one, cause they did /not/ remove it entirely: They use it on the server.

It doesn't "work", it's a hack.

50% isn't data. It's a claim without evidence. The evidence in this case may help fix React.