> IMO this is why it's popular with the jQuery crowd.
I had no idea. I've only used React, Angular, Backbone, and custom frameworks at work (mostly React in recent years), but I like what I've seen of VueJS because of its "batteries included approach" (which is React's weak point, although they seem in some ways to be moving toward being a full framework).
VueJS seems about as different from jQuery as you could get. I mean, it's even got a virtual DOM.
The closest thing you could get to jQuery? Modern, vanilla JS, whose recent APIs were often inspired by jQuery. But the jQuery crowd vehemently rejects that option because their idea of vanilla JS is stuck in the year 2010.
The reason why Vue works well for jQuery devs it’s because it allows you to continue doing what you’ve always done: server render then enhance on the client. Vue does this beautifully by accepting rendered HTML as its template. This means you can augment regular HTML and get the benefits of React without transpiration of JSX, nor the cumbersome nature of string templates in script tags. That’s where the jQuery comparison comes from, and it’s one of the major reasons for Vue’s success in that crowd. It’s a feature that doesn’t seem to get enough attention from/is often overlooked by those in the know because usually those people are writing SPAs.
I had no idea. I've only used React, Angular, Backbone, and custom frameworks at work (mostly React in recent years), but I like what I've seen of VueJS because of its "batteries included approach" (which is React's weak point, although they seem in some ways to be moving toward being a full framework).
VueJS seems about as different from jQuery as you could get. I mean, it's even got a virtual DOM.
The closest thing you could get to jQuery? Modern, vanilla JS, whose recent APIs were often inspired by jQuery. But the jQuery crowd vehemently rejects that option because their idea of vanilla JS is stuck in the year 2010.