I was looking for some pros of SolidJS but didn't really get it here. you went thru other frameworks and listed things you didn't like, might want to conclude by making a comparison table showing things you do like.
That's fair. It's sort of unfortunate that the justification for existence comes from pointing at gaps. But I suppose it comes with the territory when I consider even publishing an article like this. I was sitting on this one for weeks and wasn't sure I was going to publish it until I found myself trying to defend why I didn't just give up before I started.
The amount of hostility towards the idea of Solid is unreal at times given the choice to not try to strike out new ground with the API. The library finds itself wedged between "Why even bother with this when we have React?" and "I am very suspect this is a real thing, as everyone knows you can't do this with JSX". It immediately invalidates the whole grounds of conversation. I can't quite pinpoint it. It's like the mere concept of what I've been doing here threatens something. It blurs some lines that should never be blurred. Maybe people just like being given the choice in a form that involves picking a side as it makes things easier to understand.
But I've written several articles explaining Solid's approach and benefits preceding this.
I have over 2 dozen articles linked on the github detailing everything from design decisions to performance profiling. It's a lot of content, and I realize I need to improve the presentation of that information. But hopefully the first 2 links are what you are looking for. This for me is the culmination of years of thinking and work, and in many ways I've barely scratched the surface.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I was looking for some pros of SolidJS but didn't really get it here. you went thru other frameworks and listed things you didn't like, might want to conclude by making a comparison table showing things you do like.
That's fair. It's sort of unfortunate that the justification for existence comes from pointing at gaps. But I suppose it comes with the territory when I consider even publishing an article like this. I was sitting on this one for weeks and wasn't sure I was going to publish it until I found myself trying to defend why I didn't just give up before I started.
The amount of hostility towards the idea of Solid is unreal at times given the choice to not try to strike out new ground with the API. The library finds itself wedged between "Why even bother with this when we have React?" and "I am very suspect this is a real thing, as everyone knows you can't do this with JSX". It immediately invalidates the whole grounds of conversation. I can't quite pinpoint it. It's like the mere concept of what I've been doing here threatens something. It blurs some lines that should never be blurred. Maybe people just like being given the choice in a form that involves picking a side as it makes things easier to understand.
But I've written several articles explaining Solid's approach and benefits preceding this.
The quick "marketing" highlights can be found here:
dev.to/ryansolid/introducing-the-s...
The original more detailed Solid positives:
levelup.gitconnected.com/solid-the...
I have over 2 dozen articles linked on the github detailing everything from design decisions to performance profiling. It's a lot of content, and I realize I need to improve the presentation of that information. But hopefully the first 2 links are what you are looking for. This for me is the culmination of years of thinking and work, and in many ways I've barely scratched the surface.