martpie

See Svelte as a JavaScript library like React or Angular, which allows you to develop web applications easily.

Now, SvelteKit is bringing the library to the _framework_ level (big big emphasis on "framework", we all have different definitions for what a framework is), which adds easy routing, server-side rendering, optimized JavaScript bundles per page for the client, etc.

The usual non-productive rant.

What prevents you to do it better then? What prevent you from forking it? Sharing improvement ideas? Contributing to the project?

"It sucks" doesn't help anyone understand your frustrations and does not serve the message you're trying to share (let this one be valid or not).

Also, as everything that is open-source/free: if you hate it, don't use it, that's it. And let the people who appreciate it be productive and build awesome tools with it.

500-600mb sounds like you are shipping dev dependencies in your images.

You should use npm/yarn's production flags when installing your dependencies for your images, so you only ship runtime dependencies.

Your images will shrink to 100-150mb.

Async operations have never been to speed things up, but to prevent synchronous operations from blocking threads.

This should have no (big) performance impact, but these will most probably allow better concurrency, which can be quite critical for a web framework.

You can see their emails at the bottom: those are universities/research institutes domains. You can be sure _they_ did not actually spend that themselves.

my point is complaining about JS does not prevent people to build amazing things with it. When products are great, you do not care about the underlying technologies.

Rambling, rambling, rambling. There are so many wrong things in this post that I don't know where to start, from the design controversy to packages syntax without talking about the package manager. But other comments will debunk them better than me.

That said, a lot of people say JavaScript is bad. And yet this language is one of the most popular one in the world.

And people never ask themselves: "oh, maybe there is something I did not understand about the language/ecosystem".

> "There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses."

Peace.

ps: also, it's not the tools that matter, but what you build.

Famous one:

> There are two kind of languages: the ones everybody hates, and the ones nobody uses.

There are two kind of languages: the ones everybody hate, and the ones nobody use.

Maybe elevate the debate?

> A new wall doesn’t contain [traces of its original craftmanship]

I will add one quick thing: if that's true the initial wall is lost (obviously), old craftmanship is not lost. There is an organisation in France called "Les Compagnons du Devoir" [1] that does exactly this: (re)build things the way we built them centuries ago.

This organization has stonecutters and carpenters that could help a lot redo what was destroyed last night, with the know-how of the past.

So yes indeed, nothing is "lost", this is just another part of the cathedral's history.

  [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compagnons_du_Devoir

Next.js is an awesome framework, but dynamic routing is still a mess, and clean URL masking [0] is unnecessary complicated: you have to add a route handler to Express.js, and you have to use 2 different props to your <Link> components to make it work.

The Next team explains it because they don't want to solve this problem by shipping a definition of all the route of the app [1] because it does not scale. But while it is true, it makes dynamic routes extremely painful to use. Hopefully it will be fixed soon.

Another thing not mentioned in the blog post is they started to rewrite the core of Next.js in TypeScript too, which is a big move!

  [0] https://nextjs.org/learn/basics/clean-urls-with-route-masking
  [1] https://github.com/zeit/next.js/issues/4989#issuecomment-442024894