DEV Community

Discussion on: Redux is half of a pattern (1/2)

bradtaniguchi profile image
Brad

"Pointing failures is a bold action when everyone is blinded by hype."
I'm not sure what being "bold" with claims has to do with anything beyond ego. Nor am I sure if its reasonable to say React is "blinding by hype" at this point. At a bare minimum, hype pays the bills since React is still popular and being asked for in the job market. At a worse case its a straw man argument ("I'm right because everyone else is blind!")

"The entire idea of HTML+JS+CSS is a perfection framework, perhaps I just wanted a canvas and webassembly to make applications, because HTML was made for documents."
I don't think you understood what I meant by "perfectionist fallacy framework". The perfectionist fallacy refers to the idea "something perfect exists". I never claimed HTML+JS+CSS is a "perfect framework", nor did I claim it itself is a framework.

Furthermore, you claim "the failures of React are bad", then provide 1 example, where "React was only doing the rendering...". Which by itself sounds exactly like what React should be doing. I'm not sure if that is suppose to provide support to the claim "React is a failure", or just provide support for the alternatives you directly mention your moving toward. Unless of course your trying to compare apples to oranges, where you compare React by itself to a more "full" solution.

"This industry is built on this idea of disrupting but it won't release the bone, there's no meat anymore in HTML..."
I don't see how HTML has anything to do with disruptive tech. Or more relevantly, what frameworks do to disrupt really anything other developer viewpoints and egos.

"That's why its a failure of the ecosystem, each system in itself is good and fine, but the sum of all them is less than great."
I can see the ecosystem being multiple parts being itself an issue, but I can also see it as an advantage for those with the manpower and capabilities to leverage each part correctly together, and interchange each part. To label the entire ecosystem a failure, and together "less than great" only works if you give solid examples for all cases. At a bare minimum, it should be agreeable the React ecosystem is successful when used correctly, and its possible you can screw it up with the freedom it gives.

Thread Thread
luiz0x29a profile image
Real AI • Edited on

"I'm not sure what being "bold" with claims has to do with anything beyond ego."
It has to do with going against the crowd, that has nothing to do with being motivated by ego.
Its just a strategy, following the safe path versus going slicing the vegetation into the unknown, which has risks, but also benefits.

"Nor am I sure if its reasonable to say React is "blinding by hype" at this point"
Are we past this idea of using React everywhere, so we can start considering where its applicable ? I think not yet.
See all this discussion I caused only because I considered possibly it is not a good answer, and even considered the entire web as not the answer for the problem.

"hype pays the bills"
great argument, paying the bills, couldn't care less about anything technical do we ? better stick with ego motivation, at least it makes sense, anything could pay the bills, even flipping burgers, are we discussing merits of technology choice or what?

"React is still popular and being asked for in the job market"
Oh, the appeal for popularity, that's also a fallacy, its not an argument.

"I'm right because everyone else is blind"
Its not about being right, the moment I start choosing the technology I use based on the problem I need to solve, when others choose based on hype/popularity/job_market, I'm a bit more right, at least in my specific context/use.
I could be wrong or not, but its a bigger mistake to delegate important choices to the crowd.
Its the same argument as the 'ol you can't go wrong by choosing IBM/Microsoft/Oracle or whatever, yeah, technically no, but realistically you are also not right in your choice, popularity is the worst argument for choosing anything.

"I don't think you understood what I meant by "perfectionist fallacy framework". The perfectionist fallacy refers to the idea "something perfect exists". I never claimed HTML+JS+CSS is a "perfect framework", nor did I claim it itself is a framework. "
No, I understood it, I am seriously claiming that HTML/JS/CSS is not perfect, which should've been obvious, people just assume that without even realized, good think you didn't, because that's not what people usually do, it was just a counter-point, perhaps badly executed.
And HTML/JS/CSS are a framework, by definition, they are outside your code, and which totally dictate how your code is organized, they are not libraries, the "web" is a framework, a very bad one for making applications, but a good one for documents, which it was intended to.
And its not about being perfect, the problem with the web tech is that it is the lowest common demonominator, we don't want perfection, that doesn't mean we should accept the lowest possible solution either.
Something better must be possible, I'm betting my business on it.
Some people seem to be too invested to even consider the possibility of something better than the web...
That's their problem, not mine.

" "React was only doing the rendering...". Which by itself sounds exactly like what React should be doing. "
If React only did that... It also has hooks and try to manage state, one of the reasons I ditched it, I only need rendering, not even VDom, what if this idea of having the VDom is a wrong one?
Then that could be considered as a failure, my failure in using React to being with. To be fair, that's not React's failure, but kind of is the ecosystem failure if you go with the crowds (and they are part of an ecosystem) and just use what others are using because of popularity, that was my mistake, it won't happen again.

That wasn't supposed to be an example of were React fails. that's what I mean by ecosystem. React on its own is not bad, but it does create more problems to be solved, that's accidental complexity.
The web is rotten with accidental complexity.
My lens of failure is very simple, is a tool fit for that purpose, React is fit for its purpose, although with too much overhead.
What I claim failure is the composition of the entire ecosystem of modern web-applications, because its clearly not made for that purpose.
Of course React doesn't have anything to do with that, its just that I even consider if the "purpose" of what React achieves was even necessary. That's the question, and there's where's the biggest failure, we are using one thing made for one purpose to another purpose and claiming it is good, when there are clearly examples (like the post) which shows the problems.

When you decision, which should've been no brainer get this reaction...
I've just decided to go against the idea of needing React, not because it is a failure, but because this entire approach for solving this problem is a failure.


"I can see the ecosystem being multiple parts being itself an issue, but I can also see it as an advantage for those with the manpower and capabilities to leverage each part correctly together, "

You have to think hollistically for that, the problem is not the system being multiple parts, I can't context the idea of specialization.
The problem is that the system was made for other purpose and we got stuck in a local maxima.
That's why I said it is not great.

"To label the entire ecosystem a failure"
But it is a failure of being fit for purpose, because we didn't knew the purpose in 2004 when this insanity of using the Web document model to create applications, it all started with AJAX, and even earlier, with DHTML.

No, I don't need to give solid examples for all cases, I could do it, but then this will turn into a master's dissertation, and I have better things to do.

"At a bare minimum, it should be agreeable the React ecosystem is successful when used correctly"
I will agree with that, the system can be used succesful, albeit you have to either ignore the problems it creates, or live with them. I decided I had enough.

"freedom it gives"
There's more freedom in not being restricted by it actually, that's why I went back to "VannilaJS".