rfcs VS Next.js

You could avoid shipping down the JSX templates but only by promising to never render a comment on the client. That's basically the approach taken by this React Server Components proposal: https://github.com/josephsavona/rfcs/blob/server-components/...

Rails has experimented with this sort of thing in the past; it requires some deep integration with the HTTP server so that clients can request updates to specific chunks of the UI rather than just URLs.

a nice summary can be found here: https://github.com/josephsavona/rfcs/blob/server-components/text/0000-server-components.md

Server Components allow developers to build apps that span the server and client, combining the rich interactivity of client-side apps with the improved performance of traditional server rendering. RSC Server components have no impact on the app’s bundle’s size. RSCs can be used to fetch data from API and can’t handle state management.

With that in mind, if you’re the type of person that likes to experiment with the latest and greatest, React Server Components is well worth trying. The Server Components intro video is excellent, the React team’s RFC is a well-written guide that details how everything works. There’s also an open pull request where you can submit your own feedback on the feature.

> At a high level, React Server Components are Components that can be rendered on the server and on the client.

This is blatantly wrong. The RFC (and Dan Abramov’s video) make it clear that server components can only be run on the server, and client components can only be run on the client - only shared components run in both environments: https://github.com/josephsavona/rfcs/blob/server-components/...

There were several motivating factors behind the creation of React Server Components (the RFC lists them all), but I wanted to focus on two of the problems that I see in my work that React Server Components solves: large bundle size and waterfalls in fetching data from the server.

We could mention many other benefits, like automatic code splitting, UX improvements, etc., but I recommend you read the RFC for an in-depth explanation. For now, let’s see an example, so we can better understand how these components work.

Next.js is a powerful React framework that enables developers to build server-rendered applications, static websites, and more. It's designed for production and provides features like automatic code splitting and optimized prefetching.

// source: https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/packages/next/src/lib/worker.ts#L121C15-L129C16 for (;;) { onActivity() const result = await Promise.race(\[ (this.\_worker as any)\[method\](...args), restartPromise, \]) if (result !== RESTARTED) return result if (onRestart) onRestart(method, args, ++attempts) }

https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/27666 One of them said 'renaming folder to uppercase' might cause trouble. git might not recognize case-sensetive changes by default.

Next.js has long cemented itself as one of the front runners in the web framework world for JavaScript/TypeScript projects so we’re going to be using that. More specifically we’re going to be using V14 of Next.js which allows us to use some exciting new features like Server Actions and the App Router.

Web frameworks like Next.js will usually include this feature, but do check that they set the caching headers correctly!

Vite and Next.js are both top 5 modern development framework right now. They are both great depending on your use case so we’ll discuss 4 areas: Architecture, main features, developer experience and production readiness. After learning about these we’ll have a better idea of which one is best for your project.

> It’s important to be aware of what you are getting if you go with React, and what you are getting is a far cry from what a framework would offer, with all the corresponding pros and cons.

Would you like to elaborate on that?

In my experience, with something as great, size/ecosystem-wise as React, there will almost always be at least one "mainstream" package for whatever you might want to do with it, that integrates pretty well. Where a lot of things might come out of the box with a framework, with a library I often find myself just needing to install the "right" package, and from there it's pretty much the same.

For example, using https://angular.io/guide/i18n-overview or installing and using https://react.i18next.com/

Or something like https://angular.io/guide/form-validation out of the box, vs installing and using https://formik.org/

Or perhaps https://angular.io/guide/router vs https://reactrouter.com/en/main

Even adding something that's not there out of the box is pretty much the same, like https://primeng.org/ or https://primereact.org/

React will typically have more fragmentation and therefore also choice, but I don't see those two experiences as that different. Updates and version management/supply chain will inevitably be more of a mess with the library, admittedly.

Now, projects like Next https://nextjs.org/ exist and add what some might regard as the missing pieces and work well if you want something opinionated and with lots of features out of the box, but a lot of those features (like SSR) are actually pretty advanced and not always even necessary.

Next.js: For the website and the admin dashboard

Until the time of writing, there is no official example of how to enable runtime environmental variables in a Dockerized Next.js app, as utilizing unstable_noStore would only dynamically evaluate variables on the server (node.js runtime). There is also an interesting discussion regarding this topic on GitHub.

next.js is a very popular React framework. remix-adonisjs includes more functionality through the AdonisJS backend ecosystem, and should be easier to self-host and self-manage.