I think he just means you have to build before deploying and while developing. Even if that build takes fractions of a second and is trivially scaffolded and automated in a modern context, it’s still technically an extra step. There was a time I might have agreed with that take but I’ve since embraced the build since unless we’re talking about the kind of JavaScript you’d embed in a single blog article and then promptly forget about, chances are you’ll want to introduce build tools eventually.

I'm definitely a fan of Vite personally. You can tell the project prioritized a focus on developer experience outcomes and its very well executed in my opinion.

But the core package is ~27k SLOC with upwards of 40 dependencies. Thats an indirect, but poignant statement illustrating how much work goes into solving just a tooling problem. And while it may hide some of the overhead in its own abstraction, which it does a fantastic job of, the overhead is still there and it can still break in arcane ways.

I think the spirit of the question of "why do we even need Vite in the first place?" is whats really being explored in the original post.

I certainly don't shy away from build tools at all, but I do often try to start projects without them just as an exercise to see if they really ever end up being needed. Especially when its so easy to drop-in something like Vite after the fact if its necessary and/or clearly adds an outsized return on investment.