razzle VS parcel

Razzle is a build tool created by Airbnb, which also simplifies server-side rendering. It abstracts away the complexity of configuring server-side rendering settings and allows developers to easily create versatile JavaScript applications. Razzle supports features like code splitting, CSS-in-JS, and hot module replacement, making it suitable for building React applications that require server-side rendering.

Documentation

You don't need NextJS for SSR. There are less opinionated alternatives like Remix that was built by the React Router team and is backed by Shopify now, you can use something like Razzle or one of its alternatives for semi-opinionated pure SSR or follow the Vite Docs and just do it yourself with express.

Razzle: I've never used it personally, but based on what I can tell it seems to be an attempt to enhance the Create React App concept, enabling CSR/SSR while also working well with libraries other than React.

Razzle is a tool for building Universal applications: applications that can execute their JavaScript on the server. Or the client. Or both. Razzle uses a plugin architecture that allows you to change your mind about how you build your application. It will even let you change your mind about building your code in React, Preact, or some other framework entirely, like Elm or Vue.

5 Razzle Razzle Razzle uses this method to operate with a variety of frameworks, including Angular, Preact, Vue, Svelte, and not just React. While your app is running, just type rs in the console and press Enter to restart your server.

Ya... the answer is react ssr. I like razzle but there are others.

Somehow at the interview I was asked "what i think about difficulty of configuring Webpack for Linaria, at that moment I realized, what to find a solution to set up Linaria with SSR is not simple task", but I will show you the final result for example Razzle config:

Each component is isolated and tested separately before being exported as a complete unit. It simplifies testing, because you just have to deal with this one component if you wish to make a little change. Bit is also great for test-driven development because of its component isolation.It is available for personal and open source projects at no cost. 9.Razzle Razzle simplifies SSR configuration by encapsulating it in a single dependency. It provides developers with a similar experience to create-react-app, but with more control over frameworks, routing, and data fetching.

Razzle - Build production ready React applications. Razzle is toolchain for modern static and dynamic websites and web applications

It runs using Parcel, very simple and easy to setup. The app has 3 files:

Homepage: https://parceljs.org/

In the Changelog Podcast episode referenced above, Dan Abramov alluded to Parcel working on RSC support as well. I couldn’t find much to back up that claim aside from a GitHub issue discussing directives and a social media post by Devon Govett (creator of Parcel), so I can’t say for sure if Parcel is currently a viable option for developing with RSCs.

Parcel 2 emphasizes a zero-configuration approach to bundling web applications. It's a powerful tool that offers a hassle-free developer experience, focusing on simplicity and speed.

Once you build a simple Vite backend integration, try not to complicate Vite's configuration unless you absolutely must. Vite has become one of the most popular bundlers in the frontend space, but it wasn't the first and it certainly won't be the last. In my 7 years of building for the web, I've used Grunt, Gulp, Webpack, esbuild, and Parcel. Snowpack and Rome came-and-went before I ever had a chance to try them. Bun is vying for the spot of The New Hotness in bundling, Rome has been forked into Biome, and Vercel is building a Rust-based Webpack alternative.

Parcel

I’ve tried something similar on the frontend side: I decided to build a UI for Ollama.ai using only HTML, CSS, and JS (Single-Page Application). The goal is to learn something new and have zero runtime dependencies on other projects and NPM modules. Only Node and Parcel.js (https://parceljs.org/) are needed during development for serving files, bundling, etc. The only runtime dependency is a modern browser.

Here's what I have found so far:

- JavaScript (vanilla) is a viable alternative to React.js

Besides Webpack, there are many other popular web bundlers available, such as Parcel, Esbuild, Rollup, and more. They all have their own unique features and strengths, and you should make your decision based on the needs and requirements of your specific project. Please refer to their official websites for details.

In the Node.js ecosystem, bundling is typically handled by third-party tools rather than Node.js itself. Some of the most popular bundlers in the Node.js world include Webpack, Rollup, and Parcel, offering features like code splitting, tree shaking, and hot module replacement.

There are projects attempting to do more things. I've really enjoyed Parcel (https://parceljs.org). But it won't handle things like linting or unit testing, which you may or may not want. Vite is also pretty popular (https://vitejs.dev/), and it has a test runner.

Thing is, most of the problems described in the post aren't related to low-JS front-end libraries like HTMX or alpine. You can write React without a linter, bundler, build tool, unit testing, or linting. But with any of these projects at scale, you start wanting more:

- If you want to write unit tests in JS, you need to choose a test runner (probably Jest or Vitest -- until the built-in node testing module becomes more common).

- If you want linting, you need a linter (probably Eslint). If you want type safety, you need a type checker (probably Typescript).

- If you want to create smaller JS files to ship to production and to automatically handle assets, you need a bundler.

- If you want to use new language features while supporting old browsers, you need polyfills.

- If you want to use all these things together, you need something to bring it together (like Webpack).

So it really depends what you need! You may not need any. But as you can imagine, in many professional projects with multiple developers it's very nice to have unit tests, linting, and type checking :) (And you start caring about end-user performance a lot more, in which case optimizing the shipped bundle is important.)

Take all that, and then compare to a language like Rust, which has most of the "ecosystem stuff" built-in. In Rust, you get the test runner, the linter, dependency manager, type checker, and documentation tool all included. Easy! Thankfully, Rust doesn't have to care about whether users support modern language features (because it compiles down to lower code ahead of time), or whether the binary shipped to the client is optimally organized for downloading immediately over the internet.

It's a problem in JS because A) you have to care about more problems than many other languages since JS needs to load instantly over the wire in a web browser, and B) there is a huge amount of choice and not a lot of standardization in web tools. (And what standardization there is (Node, npm), there are still competitors trying to even further reduce the pain points.)

I think that in ten more years, we'll be in a better place, because there is push back (like this post!) against these problems, which will encourage more tools trying to solve the explosion of tools. Which seems counterintuitive, but these tools were created to solve very real problems. So I see it as a pendulum which has swung too far, but will likely swing back to a more balanced place. And you see that with tools like Vite gaining popularity.