Hacker News Reader

Comment by SeanAnderson | Hacker News Reader

I've used Trunk for about a year on an app I'm slowly building and it's worked well. I would vouch for it.

It's a little light on maintainers. They shipped one version that was broken for my use case and it took maybe a week or two for things to get corrected, but was an innocent enough mistake and they were responsive on Discord. Other than that, no issues, works exactly like you'd expect.

View on HN

+1 for trunk. In comparison with Vite, webpack, etc it's not as mature. Fewer plugins and stuff, but for the use cases it supports it's great. I use it to package a static Yew frontend and it works with minimal fuss and has hot-reload for dev too.

I'm curious about "static Yew frontend ". If your content is static, why bother with a React-like tool, let alone one that compiles to wasm? Or have I misunderstood the term used here?

Static content does not imply non-interactive.

Think video games, they can be fully static content yet highly interactive.

It is the interactivity aspect of an app that makes it a good use case for something like yew or react.

Since it is static, you don't need a server, but you can still benefit from the wasm performance and yew DX.

Great example, thank you. I had indeed conflated "static" with "non-interactive," and I definitely see how Yew could be a great fit for this sort of content. I appreciate the clarification!

Same here, have used trunk for over year and find it very easy to work with. I use it with egui and it has made distribution of my stuff really easy.

Maybe you can help me understand how this differs from wasm-pack?

It's significantly easier to configure - as in, I use it without any configuration whatsoever in my current project. Just drop an html file in your crate and run `trunk serve`.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com