Existenceblinks

It's quite a paradox value. If CTOs or tech leads are competent enough they wouldn't bring this React mess into business in the first place. But if the CTO is incompetent, he won't think he has a need for getting rid of React. So the business of getting of React only has value to companies who want to admit "we made a mistake".

It's tough for engineers when React already loses in any technical challenge. If a business were selling cheap product, that would justify poor materials. But if your business is high-end, why don't use the best materials?

Underrated. It already happened in frontend space. Job market is already rotten by incompetent tech leaders who aren't immune to all the bullshit and bought all the hype from VC-backed bigco.

Most devs have no idea what lit-html + DOM event + sub 100 lines glue code (mvc) is capable of. No useThis useThat non-sense, just call render() manually, really, it's not a big deal like at all.

At some point someone will figure out the wire up between the reactive part (thing like "signal") on wasm side and and propagate changes to the effect side to render DOM nodes.

Yes please, backend people (and compiler folks) be united to try to catch up with the latest wasm proposals, we are pretty close now (also waiting for the 'stringref'). The future is treating DOM stuff as system thingy, so we can stop (except those who want to stay) writing JS/TS on the logic part. I'm optimistic we will have a better mental heath on developing web frontend in near future.

I avoid the word 'burnout' now. Just expand a bit like 'have a long stress session and it broke mental health to a certain point that needs a fix'

Changing activities and habits is ok but paracetamol. The causes are still there.

Sorry about that I was saying in kidding tone. We're all good.

Here is the wasm binary size number (2019): https://stackoverflow.com/questions/55135927/how-do-webassem...

I didn't bookmark Zig and other for the number, it's over here and there on HN threads and Github issues.

---

I think you conflated "wasm binary size from AssemblyScript" with AssemblyScript size itself, that's why you brought up React to compare with AssemblyScript. AssemblyScript doesn't compete with React. And comparing React with the others is also tricky because of paradigm difference. React view and logic are very coupled. Compile-to-wasm langs only compete with js/ts part excluding the DOM part .. at least for now because wasm can't even share string ref right now (the "stringref" proposal is currently phase-1 ), let alone DOM access.

Wasm-gc proposal is already in phase-3. I think languages that used to also compile their runtime with app code could be smaller because wasm host manage collect the garbage for you in terms of "struct" and "array" (you can check out https://github.com/WebAssembly/gc/blob/main/proposals/gc/Ove...)

Have they try modeling around reward system? The basis of intelligence of living things are what's required in order to survive. There has to be some ways to punish the models with some kind of death equivalent.

Smallest compared to any of current capable compile-to-wasm langs. How dare you bring up React, when it's already lose to Solid which is apple-to-apple (js). React is freakin bloat. Numbers of functionality is the problems produced by itself and then solve its own problems.

If you ask me to compare to React for todo app, wasm with gc + interfacing with DOM, is going to blow React out of water in both size and performance (logic wise). DOM-wise, thing like "signal" already won anyway.

I honestly don't understand why you bring up React.

AssemblyScript produces the smallest binary and then Zig. Rust produces bloat binary by default but can be small by https://github.com/johnthagen/min-sized-rust for hello word type of app. I have no idea if the gc proposal could make those langs produce smaller binary size. That said, .wasm is generally smaller on wire and faster-to-execute on host.

I think creator's burnout happened due to personal style of working was misaligned with users (developers)' demands. I think there are some points the creator made the right choice such as disallow native code, no more fancy type like typeclass etc. And the bell curve of developers can't stand pure <-> impure interop. They rather like messy types like Typescript where js thingy can float around freely with all insane effects everywhere, plus hackable and ugly structural typing .. unsound. They thought people don't love type like they do but people rather love elegant type! .. it's off-topic now, yeah.

No "isomorphic" please. Please don't moving forward with js-everything, that's actually moving backward.

I wonder if the demo sound is generated from text? I think it's good enough, probably would pick more informal or fun profile not to sound so robotic.

> The brightness difference between background and container should be within 12% for dark interfaces, and 7% for light interfaces

I only find this useful to me.

Some others are ok. Some are I already do. Some are just natural (easy to feel that it's off)

I already saw a tweet that's the same tone as 'have fun staying poor'. It's like 'have fun be in denial'. I suspect the comment is not that unusual.

I honestly find animals are generally very smart. Maybe because they are living things, evolved and born to be survived.

Plus 1) you can't write test for it. 2) have fun debugging natural language (debugging PL is hard enough)

Blackbird written in Rust is a natural approach. Those who try to sell build the whole thing with a whole thing is unwise (look at you isomorphic javascript)

I touch grass during 30 minutes before/after sunrise and sunset 5 days a week, but never have thought if it's good enough?

Envy you seem not getting into tech twitter circle jerk yet. It's soul-crushing JS all the way down. Have you seen Typescript return type debate yet? Gosh I blocked them already.

I have seen 2-3 of this kind of CTOs in my circle. Basically co-founders of rich CEO friend.

I'm not surprised at all at this point and even if it's getting worse for reasons like that. Look around job posts today! Many CTOs can be incompetent. I'm an early adopter of X tool and encountered all the gotcha, and then I see these technical leads put X tech on their stack which they will regret later.

What we have been developing are a lot of solid building blocks. Protocol, infra, frameworks. Not just some kind of heuristic engine.

I reduce twitter time because of it. Also they are here on HN posts a lot recently so I seem to spent time less to read HN as well.

Well it has no face, no skin color, no weird looking. At this point, it reduces huge amount of failure risk already. And interview is the most non-sense process, so what does this benchmark mean?

Yes. Most SaaS are B2B and good luck getting 200 customers.

I remember those [Git]Hubbers.

I still have some hope as I see some group of people started to tackle this space in different angle. Stop approximation as a product, wrap approximation around logic and output the exact result. ChatGPT or Avatar AI is literally approximation as a product.

I can't even find their vm details (cpu/memory + bandwidth) and many other things.