DEV Community

Use components without a frontend framework

Malte Riechmann on May 27, 2021

Frontend frameworks Within this post, I will show you one, of many ways to use components without a frontend framework. Do not get me wr...

Read full post

Souk Syp. • May 27 '21 • Edited

I read 3 times and unless I’m blind, I don’t see where you applied BEM in javascript.

Also the $ sign here has nothing to do with jQuery I guess.. just a naming convention to point out that it holds an element.

Malte Riechmann • May 27 '21 • Edited

Thanks for your comment. It made me smile. You are not blind. You are right. I did not go into details with applying BEM to JavaScript, although I said so: »I am going to show you how to use it for JavaScript, too«.

The JavaScript part in my post does show how to create an isolated environment for each instance of a block. To go further, maybe a small teaser for a gallery block can help.

(function () {

  var initializeGallery = function($gallery) {
    var $galleryNextButton = $gallery.querySelector('.gallery__next-button'),
      $galleryPreviousButton = $gallery.querySelector('.gallery__previous-button'),
      $galleryItems = $gallery.querySelector('.gallery__items');

    $galleryNextButton.addEventListener('click', function() {
      // …
    });

    $galleryPreviousButton.addEventListener('click', function() {
      // …
    });
  };

  document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', function() {
    var $galleries = document.querySelectorAll('.gallery');

    for (var i = $galleries.length - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
      initializeGallery($galleries[i]);
    }
  });

}());

Souk Syp. • May 27 '21

Thanks for this example (extended) and kudos to this loop counting backward 😆

for (var i = $cards.length - 1; i >= 0; i--){...}

peerreynders • May 27 '21 • Edited

Another practice that may be worth considering is using JavaScript Hooks (though it isn't universally accepted; see also Decoupling Your HTML, CSS, and JavaScript).

<section class="gallery js-gallery">
  <!-- other block elements -->
  <div>
    <button class="gallery__previous-button" name="previous-button">Previous</button>
    <button class="gallery__next-button" name="next-button">Next</button>
  </div>
  <div class="gallery__items">
    <!-- more -->
  </div>
</section>

document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', function() {
  var $galleries = document.querySelectorAll('.js-gallery');
  for (var i = $galleries.length - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
    initializeGallery($galleries[i]);
  }
});

Now superficially this may come across as redundant but as stated by Harry Roberts:

I have known occasions before when trying to refactor some CSS has unwittingly removed JS functionality because the two were tied to each other—it was impossible to have one without the other.

It could also be seen as helpful that the js-* classes within the HTML clearly identify those blocks (or elements) that have behavioural enhancements (i.e. are "JavaScript components").

It isn't always necessary to use class-based JavaScript hooks on elements inside a block. Given that a block/component instance is already scoped on a particular fragment of the DOM it is possible to more easily select on non-class features or the fragment's internal structure to bind element behaviour.

var $galleryNextButton = $gallery.querySelector('button[name="next-button"]'),
    $galleryPreviousButton = $gallery.querySelector('button[name="previous-button"]'),
    $galleryItems = $gallery.lastElementChild;

See also:

Malte Riechmann • May 28 '21

Thanks for the insights. I once tried the js- prefix, but did not like it that much. I like to use same classes for JavaScript and CSS.

And also thanks for showing me how to use syntax highlighting at DEV. I will update my post as soon as possible.

Malte Riechmann • May 27 '21

Regarding the $ sign. Yes, I use it to point out which variables hold DOM elements.

chris-czopp • May 28 '21

It's my personal opinion but I think these days, unless you're web app doesn't require any JS, manipulating DOM manually is a very risky approach. It's very easy to get into a spaghetti call stack if you e.g. need to fetch and interpolate some data into DOM (especially when constructing lists). Having said that, I see why shifting towards roots using pure JS + HTML + CSS might look attractive. And I see how CV-driven development became so popular, and that over-engineering and using fancy tech-stack takes precedence over the product/feature being implemented. Luckily there are still minimalistic rendring libraries, micro frameworks, starter boilerplates or even entire self-contained tools which purpose is to make you productive.

Malte Riechmann • May 28 '21

Thanks for your opinion on this. I think it is safe to do simple DOM manipulating without a framework.

Jonatas de Moraes Junior • May 27 '21

Just be careful: going frameworkless is a one-way trip. =)

Here is my small attempt: github.com/Honatas/frameworkless-j...

peerreynders • May 28 '21

"Frameworkless" doesn't necessarily imply going "full vanilla". It's possible to use libraries like µhtml (and related) to take care of some of the tedious details while having your own code supply the plumbing of the client side page/application.

Everyone needs a framework; what everyone doesn't need is a general purpose framework. Nobody has a general problem, everyone has a very specific problem they're trying to solve.

Rasmus Lerdorf - original creator of PHP

Nonetheless having knowledge of the more common Web APIs on a detailed level (first) is invaluable.

Malte Riechmann • May 27 '21

Thanks for commenting.

I like your approach, but isn't it a bit of a framework? ;)

Jonatas de Moraes Junior • May 27 '21

A very small one, nonetheless. Anything you do that tries to avoid code duplicity will end up looking like a framework anyway. The point of frameworkless is not to avoid frameworks at all, but to make things simple and keep the code under your control, in order to be able to eliminate as much technical debt as possible. Which I believe is exactly what you want to do with your approach: keep things simple, stick to the basics.
But yeah, I guess I could strip some stuff from there and go even simpler, but then I wouldn't have a Router anymore. Sad. ;)

vladi160 • May 29 '21

I am not sure, where is that BEM in JS, too, but in CSS, BEM is overpriced, like you fix a problem that doesn't exists just to think something is much more organized and at the end, the class names are longer that the content inside the element.