signals VS lit

Putting the runic terminology aside and looking into how the signal primitive is implemented should dispel the magic. I learned a lot from examining preact's implementation: https://github.com/preactjs/signals/blob/main/packages/core/...

https://refactoring.guru/design-patterns/observer/typescript/example https://indepth.dev/posts/1269/finding-fine-grained-reactive-programming#how-it-works https://legendapp.com/open-source/legend-state/ https://legendapp.com/open-source/state/fine-grained-reactivity/ https://www.builder.io/blog/usesignal-is-the-future-of-web-frameworks https://dev.to/ryansolid/a-hands-on-introduction-to-fine-grained-reactivity-3ndf https://medium.com/hackernoon/becoming-fully-reactive-an-in-depth-explanation-of-mobservable-55995262a254 https://preactjs.com/blog/introducing-signals/ https://hygraph.com/blog/react-memo

All the frameworks are starting to adapt them. You can easily add them to react project as well. https://preactjs.com/blog/introducing-signals/

Signals are a design paradigm for reactive programming which have recently trended in the JS frontend space. For e.g., https://preactjs.com/blog/introducing-signals/

Compare Vue's reactivity system to the principles the Preact authors write about here:

Reactivity libraries are at the heart of modern web component frameworks like Solid, Qwik, Vue, and Svelte. And in some cases you can add fine-grained reactive state management to other libraries like Lit and React. Reactively comes with a decorator for adding reactive properties to any class, as well as prototype integration with Lit. Preact Signals comes with a prototype integration with React. Expect more integrations as these reactivity cores mature.

State solution should not be a framework, this is what I dislike in riverpod as well.. its a FRAMEWORK... compare to the simple useSignal hook that preact has https://preactjs.com/blog/introducing-signals/ this looks like an overkill.

Looks like it's coming from here https://preactjs.com/blog/introducing-signals

Sciter got native (built-in) Signal implementation made after PReact's Signals;

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.

https://github.com/lit/lit/tree/main/packages/labs/virtualiz...

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.

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.

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.

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/

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/