What more do you need than writing something like `data-on-input__debounce.200ms="@get('/examples/active_search/search')"` in the DOM as being crazy and wrong?
The poster provided an example of poor abstraction. HTML for display, JS for client side logic. Combining them is part of the problem with other popular frameworks.
No, it's the entire point of datastar - that you don't need much JavaScript at all because some simple html attributes do most of it for you, and any extra can either go in-line, or you can also just fallback to separate js scripts if needed.
I mean, that seems ugly to me, but... Makes intuitive sense and is fine actually? Is HTML a rich language in which to embed stuff like this? No. Does this clearly get the point across? Yes.
[Edit: this should've actually been attached to the GP comment. I agree with the parent.]
Isn't that the whole point of hypermedia frameworks like Datastar and HTMX? It's to extend the declarativeness of HTML.
If you don't like the syntax, that's your preference. But I'm curious to hear why this is "wrong". Since that's a more objective thing, we can discuss it
But again, the API design woes are subjective and I think it's perfectly fine to iterate on getting this to a nicer state.
"Wrong" to me suggests a gap in the understanding of fundamentals or of how things work. If the ideas of Datastar are fine to all of us, and our issues with it are ergnomics, then that can be a more focused discussion.
Both Datastar and HTMX have the same issue: they want to pretend to be HTML. So they force themselves into writing several DSLs like this to pretend that this is still "just HTML".
Since they have a full "Datastar expression" language, I'd just expand that. Then you wouldn't need these weird constructs: