|
|
|
|
|
by lelanthran
519 days ago
|
|
> Multiple times in the docs it compares a huge complicated JSX like component and replaces it with 3 lines of html and 3 lines of css. I've seen my fair share of React code, and the code he is displaying is definitely idiomatic React. > It could use less grand claims and focus more on what it really does. Agreed. While I appreciate that a rationale is needed for something like this, I think his presentation of the rationale was far too verbose compared to diving into some code. Maybe I'm not the target - I would have preferred more code and less pontificating, because I 'noped right out of React and others. What I have as a replacement in standard JS, HTML and CSS is unsatisfying to me. |
|
It's really not. There's nothing, for example, stopping you from using <dialog> in React. It works perfectly fine and can integrate with any state or event manager if you want it to.
What he's doing is comparing brand-new web features that don't have good support yet with long-standing solutions that were needed years before those web features were a glimmer in anyone's eye.