Hacker News Reader

Comment by commandlinefan | Hacker News Reader

In addition to which, jQuery was actual useful - React is just pure overhead with no real functionality.

I don’t understand how you can claim that react is pure overhead. Sure it does have overhead, but it’s also a really useful abstraction. How composable abstraction for UI components that enables local reasoning not functionality.

jQuery is just pure overhead with no real functionality compared to vanilla js.

React is vastly overused. You don't need every single element in your page to be a separate component when 95% of your site is pure text and you have an occasional form or a button here and there.

If you're making an actual application (think Discord/Spotify) then yes, it becomes a necessary abstraction. Your personal website or news website (or many others) using React is a waste of my bandwidth and CPU cycles.

Agreed it doesn’t make sense for a lot of things that could just be static sites. But you also wouldn’t need jQuery on such sites so I’m not sure why that matters.

Don’t forget about server side rendering. If you only need to serve static, you don’t really need any Jack, anyway.

React's core functionality is to manage the relationship between state and the dom.

jQuery lets you imperatively manipulate the dom.

They're different use cases; calling one useful and the other not isn't a very accurate representation.

No, React’s strength is to componentize your webapp, allowing several teams to work on objects that can be reused by each other.

Sure, it does that too, but that is not its runtime purpose.

Many, many approaches solve organizing your code; React is in the middle of a large pack here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com