In this example yes, but it does not matter who wrote the function, is extra JS code that does not carry its weight. It does not add any benefit, it is just syntax sugar. It is extra code that runs on VM, is downloaded and you have to learn it.
It is not ebough to learn html, you have to learn what elements are in hyperscript as functions, again, a layer of useless complexity in the developers head.
As far as I know, JSX compiles to only one function, the h function (or hyper function). The type of element you create is actually passed as the first argument as a string to this function. Therefore, as long as you only create built-in HTML elements (and not, let's say, custom react components) there are no additional functions involved.
The h-function takes three parameters:
The name/type of the element as a string
The properties of the element as an object
An array of child elements, in turn produced by the h function
In this example yes, but it does not matter who wrote the function, is extra JS code that does not carry its weight. It does not add any benefit, it is just syntax sugar. It is extra code that runs on VM, is downloaded and you have to learn it.
It is not ebough to learn html, you have to learn what elements are in hyperscript as functions, again, a layer of useless complexity in the developers head.
But JSX also compiles into javascript functions, doesn't it?
As far as I know, JSX compiles to only one function, the
hfunction (orhyperfunction). The type of element you create is actually passed as the first argument as a string to this function. Therefore, as long as you only create built-in HTML elements (and not, let's say, custom react components) there are no additional functions involved.The
h-function takes three parameters:hfunctionSo, this example:
<span><i>Hello!</i></span>would compile to something like this:
h('span', {}, [ h('i', {innerHTML: 'Hello!'}, []) ] )sounds reasonable:)