docker-django-react-example VS esbuild

So I actually recently dealt with this, sharing this as hopefully it helps you.

https://github.com/ospira/docker-django-react-example

In essence, you need two instances of VSCode running connected to two separate Docker container instances. As I understand it, it's one remote container per VSCode window. Thus, I found this to be best, even though it isn't strictly speaking necessary, but it ends up feeling that way because as you said the language server integration (intellisense and extensions) will not work properly if not connected to the right container.

If you load this up in vs code it should prompt you properly given the presence of the files in `.devcontainter` dir. Having two windows in VSCode is kind of annoying at first, but I found it was actually fine, especially on macOS where tabbing to the other VSCode window (as opposed to ungrouped alt+tab on windows) was painless, and also kept me more organized not having backend and frontend code right next to each other.

Pre-bundle all the dependencies on the "optimization boundary" list into node_modules/.vite/deps/ folder. This step is done by esbuild.

ESBuild is a bundler. The subtitle on the website is literally “An extremely fast bundler for the web”. To bundle, pass —-bundle flag.

https://esbuild.github.io/

esbuild for bunding both the client and server separately

> like individual loaders/modules are/were slow, rather than webpack itself

tbh this is just nitpicking, I'm not a react developer to do CRA debugging for them. They're paid by Facebook a couple orders of magnitude more than what we're making here, and if they're fine with the intact CRA configuration being that slow, while a third-party alternative rips through the massive pile of shit I'm working on while not bringing any obvious downsides, I'll just to the alternative.

It's a well known problem: esbuild, which is the base of vite's HMR, boasts of speeds dozens to hundreds of times faster than webpack:

https://github.com/evanw/esbuild?tab=readme-ov-file#why

Micro-frontend has always aroused my curiosity: I wanted to understand how they work, how to build them, what their pros and cons are. In 2018, inspired by this topic, I tried to build something similar to single-spa in one of the pet projects. At that time, there was no Webpack Module Federation (WMF), and Webpack itself seemed inconvenient. The choice fell on ESBuild and importmap. Browser support for importmap at the time was mostly on paper or with special flags in browsers. For this reason, I used a polyfill. But, surprisingly, everything worked and even in several projects.

Why esbuild? compared to other tools esbuild keeps things minimal, it is very fast(the fastest bundler as of today) and supports typescript and esm by default.

Instant Hot Module Replacement (HMR): During development, Vite only processes the changed files and updates them in the browser instantly, making it incredibly fast and responsive. Optimized Build Process: Vite uses esbuild under the hood for fast JavaScript transpilation, which is significantly faster than Babel. Production Build with Rollup: For production builds, Vite uses Rollup, a highly efficient bundler that produces optimized code.

We have transitioned to using Esbuild for our project's build process and, experiencing a substantial increase in speed compared to our previous setup with Webpack. The primary bottleneck we faced with Webpack was its long build times. Now, with Esbuild integrated into our development environment, our build times have been dramatically reduced to about five seconds, significantly enhancing the efficiency of our workflow.