jsx VS petite-vue

Svelte syntax? Yes, there is upcoming initiative JSX 2.0 which includes shorthands like that. However, have no idea whether it will be released any time soon. So let's say "this is part of React/JSX 1.0" (shrugging)

Inherent support for JSX in the language itself

JavaScript ＋ HTML（DOM）＝　JSX

FWIW, the className prop is a React thing not a JSX thing. Other libraries which use JSX will happily accept a plain class prop. The React limitation is abstraction leakage: props are not attributes, they map to DOM properties.

But to the point that JSX is a DSL, that limitation is specifically because React itself is very tightly coupled to DOM semantics… but JSX explicitly has no built in semantics[1].

1: First sentence of https://facebook.github.io/jsx/ - “JSX is an XML-like syntax extension to ECMAScript without any defined semantics.”

JSX stands for 'JavaScript XML' and is a syntax extension for JavaScript. It is used to create DOM elements that are then rendered in the React DOM. Although it looks like HTML, it is actually an XML-like syntax specifically written for use in React. Interestingly, JSX is not valid JavaScript either. JSX needs to be compiled by a tool like Babel to be translated into regular JavaScript that a browser can understand. Put simply, JSX describes what the UI should look like, and React takes care of properly rendering it.

Alternatively, you can use JSX syntax (like with React), but then you need build-tools.

Note: For React component files (JSX) we'll use .tsx to maintain JSX support and for non React files we'll use the .ts file extension. However, if you want you could still use .ts file extension for React components without any problem.

I’m concerned that you’re falling into the same trap here with integrating your own variant of JSX, and mulling over adding more things like hyphens in unquoted object literal keys.

JSX is popular enough that it’s safe, ECMAScript isn’t going to break it, but your alterations to JSX are already significantly incompatible: you have being equivalent to JSX("input", {"class": "search"}, null), but the JSX everyone else is using has that equivalent to JSX(input.search, {}, null). I’m not certain if your JSX syntax is supposed to be able to be used with React code or anything else that uses JSX syntax, but if yes then it’ll be broken in a significant number of cases so that it’s worse than useless, and if no, well, it’s going to be misleading, and what if JSX did get merged into ECMAScript in some form? Then you’d be incompatible with ECMAScript again.

Same deal with hyphens in unquoted object literal keys: it’s not part of ECMAScript now, but just because it’d be a syntax error now doesn’t mean it always will be. Decorators in TypeScript are a good example of things going badly wrong even when an extremely popular project is involved.

I say: if you want to go JavaScript, go JavaScript, maaaaaybe plus standard JSX conforming with <https://facebook.github.io/jsx/>, and no further. Even if what you do is obviously superior, &c. &c. I’d apply the same reasoning on your fork of CSS: you introduced it for a good reason back then, but now it’s just friction, even if it’s a little better in a vacuum (and maybe it is in parts, maybe it isn’t in other parts).

Then it might be time for a pull request which identifies these parts as JSX.

Something similar: https://github.com/vuejs/petite-vue (6kb subset of Vue) but the project seems abandoned.

I started with petite-vue because Vue seemed too large of a file size for my simple projects. Wanting to use Vue but after reading some of the comments, I might go with Svelte.

Like: petite-vue And/or a zero-dependency lightweight state management solution.

I recommend trying https://github.com/vuejs/petite-vue as a minimalist library for declarative reactive view/model data binding, it could at least halve the code used for generating view

Maybe I’ve spent 5 days on and off researching this. I was able to recreate it perfectly using petite-vue https://github.com/vuejs/petite-vue which is nice, but it does not have all the features I need in Vue3

“petite-vue is indeed intended to fill the gap for progressive enhancement cases where Vue 3 would be too heavy-handed.

It is not abandoned, but rather it is considered "done" because the scope is well defined. I don't think it needs more features (as that would defeat the purpose of being lean and minimal). If you find yourself needing more than what petite-vue provides, you can either go up to Vue proper, or try https://alpinejs.dev/.

That said, I should update the README to indicate this more clearly.”

Github discussion: https://github.com/vuejs/petite-vue/discussions/53

You might consider doing as much as possible in Razor pages and then use https://github.com/vuejs/petite-vue for any functionality you might (components/interactivity/etc.) need.

As another alternative, you could look at petite-vue if you just want to sprinkle from Vue-like components throughout your site... Doesn't have the full force of vue, but maybe it's enough.