|
|
|
|
|
by wolfadex
1879 days ago
|
|
Having spent the past year plus in very large (over 1M loc) and old (10+ years) Ember code bases and having used it about 6-7 years ago I can confidently say that Ember has a very different mantra. Ember's selling point for many years has been "If you know Ember at company A then you know Ember at every company" (paraphrasing here). I've found this to not only not hold true, but to be very unhelpful for onboarding new developers. Conversely I've onboarded devs onto Elm projects with lots of ease. Those Ember diehards definitely still exist too, I work with a lot of them. They, like a lot of the Elm die hards, are also really kind people and great devs. The main difference I've seen is that Elm devs get to spend most of their time building features while the Ember devs end up spending much of their time trying to keep up with Ember and a lot of time dealing with project build bugs and infra. I've also been writing React on and off for around 6 years and can confidently say that React doesn't suffer from maintenance issues in the same way that Ember does. Where it does fall short of Elm, even when including TypeScript, is both speed (both build and runtime performance) and ease of refactoring. I've also spent the past 2 months working on a small-ish Svelte + TypeScript app. That's probably the closest I've come to the experience of using Elm. It's runtime performance is on par with Elm, sometimes faster and sometimes slower. It's build time is still a bit slow, mostly due to TypeScript, and it's onboarding is quite quick for someone who already knows HTML + CSS + JS. It still falls short when it comes to refactoring though as it just can't match the error messages that Elm is able to provide. Just my 2 cents having used many of the frameworks for many years. |
|