lit
htm
Our great sponsors
lit | htm | |
---|---|---|
141 | 42 | |
17,489 | 8,554 | |
1.8% | - | |
9.4 | 0.0 | |
8 days ago | 3 months ago | |
TypeScript | JavaScript | |
BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License | Apache License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
lit
-
I've created yet another JavaScript framework
That is the reason why I experiment with the TiniJS framework for a while. It is a collection of tools for developing web/desktop/mobile apps using the native Web Component technology, based on the Lit library. Thank you the Lit team for creating a great tool assists us working with standard Web Component easier.
- Web Components e a minha opinião sobre o futuro das libs front-end
-
Show HN: I made a Pinterest clone using SigLIP image embeddings
https://github.com/lit/lit/tree/main/packages/labs/virtualiz...
-
What We Need Instead of "Web Components"
actually, looking at it (https://lit.dev/), i do exactly that.
I also define a `render()` and extend my own parent, which does a `replaceChildren()` with the render. And, strangely, I also call the processor `html`
I'll still stick with mine however, my 'framework' is half-page of code. I dislike dependencies greatly. I'd need to be saving thousand+ lines at least.
Here, I don't want a build system to make a website; that's mad. So I don't want lit. I want the 5 lines it takes to invoke a dom parser, and the 5 lines it takes do define a webcomp parent.
-
Web Components Aren't Framework Components
I rather like https://lit.dev/ for web components so far.
For the reactivity stuff, you might want to read https://frontendmasters.com/blog/vanilla-javascript-reactivi... - it shows a bunch of no-library-required patterns that, while in a number of cases I'd much rather use a library myself, all seems at least -basically- reasonable to me and will probably be far more comprehensible to you than whatever I'd reach for, and frameworks are always much more pleasant to approach after you've already done a bunch of stuff by banging rocks together first.
- Reddit just completed their migration out of React
-
Web Components Eliminate JavaScript Framework Lock-In
I work on Lit, which I would hesitate to call a framework, but gives a framework-like DX for building web components, while trying to keep opinions to a minimum and lock-in as low as possible.
It's got reactivity, declarative templates, great performance, SSR, TypeScript support, native CSS encapsulation, context, tasks, and more.
It's used to build Material Design, settings and devtools UIs for Chrome, some UI for Firefox, Reddit, Photoshop Web...
https://lit.dev if you're interested.
-
HTML Web Components
I am more a fan of the augmented style because it doesn't entrap you in dev lock-in to platforms.
The problem with frameworks, especially web frameworks, is they reimplement many items that are standard now (shadowdom, components, storage, templating, base libraries, class/async, network/realtime etc).
If you like the component style of other frameworks but want to use Web Components, Google Lit is quite nice.
Google Lit is like a combination of HTML Web Components and React/Vue style components. The great part is it is build on Web Components underneath.
[1] https://lit.dev/
-
Web Components Will Outlive Your JavaScript Framework
From the comments I see here, it seems like people expect the Webcomponents API to be a complete replacement for a JS framework. The thing is, our frameworks should start making use of modern web APIs, so the frameworks will have to do less themselves, so can be smaller. Lit [0] for example is doing this. Using Lit is very similar to using React. Some things work different, and you have to get used to some web component specific things, but once you get it, I think it's way more pleasant to work with than React. It feels more natural, native, less framework-specific.
For state management, I created LitState [1], a tiny library (really only 258 lines), which integrates nicely with Lit, and which makes state management between multiple components very easy. It's much easier than the Redux/flux workflows found in React.
So my experience with this is that it's much nicer to work with, and that the libraries are way smaller.
[0] https://lit.dev/
- Lit – a small responsive CSS framework
htm
-
VanJS: A 0.9KB JavaScript UI framework
The preact team also dislikes transpiling jsx so they've developed an alternative using tagged template literals: https://github.com/developit/htm
-
React SSR web-server from scratch
So getting this to work without bundler magic is very hard. It's not surprising why NextJS is investing in a bundler. Though one thing that really sticks out is how much complexity we add for just miniscule dev ergonomics. Not using JSX and using something like htm would make all this easier (removing the bundler entirely), it's a lot of overhead to avoid a couple of quotes. React should really have a tagged-template mode. Also all of this is indirection is actually bad for dev ergonomics too! One of the reasons I did this is because I'm absolutely sick of magic caches and sorting through code that's been crushed by a bundler into something I don't recognize and can't easily debug. While we can't get rid of this completely (ts/jsx) this preserves the module import graph completely on the client-side making it easy to find things as you are working and preserving line numbers. This obviously is not useful for a production build and there's a lot of work that would need to go in to support both modes over the same code, but it's depressing no tools really work like this for local development.
-
HTML Web Components
You can also do JSX and skip the build step with preact + htm : https://github.com/developit/htm#example
-
Service Worker Templating Language (SWTL)
While I was able to achieve this fairly easily, the developer experience of manually stitching strings together wasnt great. Being myself a fan of buildless libraries, such as htm and lit-html, I figured I'd try to take a stab at implementing a DSL for component-like templating in Service Workers myself, called Service Worker Templating Language (SWTL), here's what it looks like:
-
Gaseous - Yet Another Games Manager
I would however highly recommend https://github.com/developit/htm
-
Create and Hydrate HTML with HTM
I thought the same thing, but apparently "HTM" is a JSX like javascript string template representation of HTML, and it can be found here: https://github.com/developit/htm
-
Anyone using React from just a CDN, barbarian style?
If you're going to do a no-build approach, assume modern JS (so you don't have to transpile the JS syntax). Also, you can use https://github.com/developit/htm as a nearly-identical equivalent to JSX syntax, also without transpiling.
-
Simple Modern JavaScript Using JavaScript Modules and Import Maps
This seems like a case of caring way too much about something that's hardly very different. JSX versus tagged template strings can be incredibly similar to one another.
The examples in this article are using vanilla template strings to author raw html, but that only misses a couple of nicities JSX has. There are tagged template string libraries like htm[1] that do include some of the few nicities JSX has, but which are actually compatible with the official language.
[1] https://github.com/developit/htm
-
A few programming language features I’d like to see
The first one exists in JavaScript and is called Tagged Template Literals. I agree with the author that its a nice feature. It's the perfect construct to use for prepared SQL statements, LINQ-style queries, or reimplementing a JSX-like syntax (see HTM https://github.com/developit/htm).
-
Using React without JSX == no build
There is however a library that is closer to JSX (HTML-like feel) but yet does not require a build step. htm. HTM uses tagged templates to leverage template literal as native Javascript template strings. If you have not played with tagged templates, I encourage you to check this out, it's a quite powerful feature, that has recently become a part of Javascript.
What are some alternatives?
Svelte - Cybernetically enhanced web apps
jsx - The JSX specification is a XML-like syntax extension to ECMAScript.
stencil - A toolchain for building scalable, enterprise-ready component systems on top of TypeScript and Web Component standards. Stencil components can be distributed natively to React, Angular, Vue, and traditional web developers from a single, framework-agnostic codebase.
Preact - ⚛️ Fast 3kB React alternative with the same modern API. Components & Virtual DOM.
Vue.js - This is the repo for Vue 2. For Vue 3, go to https://github.com/vuejs/core
esbuild-plugin-alias - esbuild plugin for path aliases
Angular - Deliver web apps with confidence 🚀
babel-plugin-react-html-attrs - Babel plugin which transforms HTML and SVG attributes on JSX host elements into React-compatible attributes
htmx - </> htmx - high power tools for HTML
vim-jsx-pretty - :flashlight: [Vim script] JSX and TSX syntax pretty highlighting for vim.
babel-plugin-proposal-pattern-matching - the minimal grammar, high performance JavaScript pattern matching implementation