thinkdeep VS lit

A complex codebase needs to be kept as simple as possible. In Predecos, one way this is done is through use of full-stack JavaScript, meaning developers only need experience with one language to maintain the codebase. Some differences exist in NodeJS when compared with browser-based JavaScript but those are minor compared with having to work in multiple languages. Front-end and back-end dependencies are also kept as uniform as possible. For example, Mocha and Chai are used in both the front-end and back-end meaning experience with said tools enables development in either. Developer setup and deployment should also be straightforward. Predecos uses Helm v3.8.2 to trigger one-click deployment of all the microservices. After doing this and setting a couple environment variables, one can easily start the front-end by using yarn run start then they are ready for development. This is also valuable when doing a deployment. When CircleCI went down, the impact was slight because automated deployment and manual deployment were very similar. All that was required was modifying the CircleCI config for the terminal, building the necessary docker images manually, pushing those images and running helm upgrade. A simple and fast mitigation that saved a lot of time. Diverging from simplicity was sometimes necessary though. Some may argue that use of Kubernetes makes the codebase difficult to understand by virtue of its high learning curve. However, the stability, reliability, documentation and wide-spread adoption of Kubernetes made it hard to resist. Google Cloud Platform (GCP), Amazon Web Services (AWS), Microsoft Azure and DigitalOcean all have Kubernetes offerings. This means applications developed on Kubernetes are largely portable from one cloud provider to another. Predecos uses DigitalOcean’s managed Kubernetes product because it is low-cost when compared to the other options. Should the desire for features such as, for example, encryption at rest arise, one option would be to migrate to Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE). Some modifications would be necessary but because Predecos is in a proof-of-concept (PoC) state and minimal data has been stored that migration would likely be simple.

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/