Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by rk06 496 days ago
In theory, yes Vite is webpack replacement. CRA is a different beast. So, what is CRA’s replacement? Vite + vite-plugin-react.

But that is quite a mouthful, so people shorten it to Vite. So, when they say switch to Vite, Vite-react plug-in is implied. No one is recommending rolling your own Vite plug-in for react
1 comments
nsonha 495 days ago
CRA does much more than just supporting jsx, which any bundler should be able to do without a "plugin".

What else does that plugin do? HMR? Equivalence to CRA is next, which is a set of opinionated loaders and config. But next also has the router and some react utils on top.

link
rk06 494 days ago
CRA also does not include router, and is not extensible. If the goal was to replace CRA with equally bad tool then next might be considered a viable alternative.

The goal however is to create a minimal setup to get started with React SPA. And vite's starter template does better

link
nsonha 494 days ago
Next is nowhere near "equally" as bad as CRA, it's made by a company not a *community* of front end engineer wannabes. Try to make honest assessments instead of whatever works in favor of your argument.

Next is that minimal setup, that has everything you need. Saying vite is a "minimal setup" is like saying webpack is a minimal setup, if by that you mean an useless setup wherein you have to then add a bunch of libraries for basic needs. That directly contradicts with the idea of being minimal.

link
rk06 492 days ago
Next is being actively developed, that alone makes it great compared to CRA.

But when it comes to migration from CRA, next is very different from CRA, so much that you might as well call it “rewrite” instead .

Next by itself is a great option but not for migrating from cra

link