> React makes sense for FB's bloated, complex web app. Your CRUD app will do fine with far simpler dev tools.
And that would be what? Exactly?
I did a personal project last year that was vanilla HTML/CSS/Js, with some templating in Go (I know it's templating isn't the best, comparatively). By the end, I wish I would have done it in React. I ended up re-inventing the wheel for a lot of things, and ended up with something that was decidedly messier. All while attempting to be more simplistic.
I wish Web Components would have taken off. When Polymer first launched, I was totally on board. I loved the idea of writing vanilla frontends, and using Web Components where I needed extended functionality (vs a full framework). But, it didn't, and unless your site is super simple, and mostly static, React et al. are the best ways to create frontends.
Tools actually intended for building non bloated, non complex CRUD apps. Django, Rails, Laravel, .NET, Spring, I can go on.
Instead Go was selected, templating HTML by hand, and assumedly doing nearly everything else by hand well. That is not the optimal solution for a simple CRUD app’s implementation, and isn’t reflective of anything but poor engineering.
And that would be what? Exactly?
I did a personal project last year that was vanilla HTML/CSS/Js, with some templating in Go (I know it's templating isn't the best, comparatively). By the end, I wish I would have done it in React. I ended up re-inventing the wheel for a lot of things, and ended up with something that was decidedly messier. All while attempting to be more simplistic.
I wish Web Components would have taken off. When Polymer first launched, I was totally on board. I loved the idea of writing vanilla frontends, and using Web Components where I needed extended functionality (vs a full framework). But, it didn't, and unless your site is super simple, and mostly static, React et al. are the best ways to create frontends.