[martpie]

Lots of valid points about the increase in complexity for React over the years, and that one should pick another more modern tech stack (Svelte, Solid, html, whatever), and I used to be thinking like that

But since maybe 1-2 years, I am back and betting on React for most of my serious projects (for the ecosystem, the ease of hiring, etc), but the most important point is the following:

React backwards compatibility is really good, and will stay so for a good reason: a LOT of Meta’s UI code is using old features (classes syntax etc), and Meta cannot afford to break those. If there are breaking changes, they must be “codemodable” (so, usable by everyone).

Meaning in terms of stability, I know my codebase today will still work fine in years ( or upgrade-able with minimal efforts). Of course there will be new shiny features, but I or my team will not have to rewrite old code all the time following tedious migration guides.

disclaimer: I am kind of biased as I work at Meta, but far from React.

[gardnr]

So, your team upgraded to React 18 without having to rewrite anything?

[Cthulhu_]

The person you're replying to did not say that, you're arguing against a straw man. Looking at the manual, upgrading to 18 seems straightforward, matching the "minimal efforts" they mentioned: https://react.dev/blog/2022/03/08/react-18-upgrade-guide

[gardnr]

Arguing isn't the correct word for that. I did express incredulity when asking for clarification.

The person I was replying to did minimize the effort involved in upgrades by enclosing it in parentheses.

The incredulity is based on experience. Sure you can follow the upgrade guide, and if you work at Meta there are many people that know about weird edge cases. If you don't work at Meta, then you may be spending time chasing down bugs in production on your own. That gets expensive.