wordpress-playground VS lit

Sorry friend, WordPress already beat you to it: https://github.com/WordPress/wordpress-playground

> Is there a reason why using OPFS directly from SQLite doesn't work?

I'm guessing this means using SQLite WASM's built-in OPFS integration as described in these articles:

- sqlite3 WebAssembly documentation - Persistent Storage Options: OPFS - https://sqlite.org/wasm/doc/trunk/persistence.md#opfs

- SQLite Wasm in the browser backed by the Origin Private File System - https://developer.chrome.com/blog/sqlite-wasm-in-the-browser...

Within the Playground, SQLite interacts with the database file in MEMFS only, and the Playground coordinates the syncing from MEMFS to OPFS.

https://github.com/WordPress/wordpress-playground/tree/trunk...

The reason for this, I believe, is that the primary use case is/was to have the entire file system in memory, including SQLite's database file. This was the original implementation, and is still the default behavior. Persistence was later added as an optional feature.

The good news is that browser support for OPFS seems to be getting better. From the SQLite docs:

  As of March 2023 the following browsers are known to have the necessary APIs:

One of the most exciting things at WordCamp Europe 2023 for me was discovering how far along the WordPress Playground project is. If you haven’t heard of the playground before, it’s a full version of WordPress, running directly in your browser!

WordPress has an official WebAssembly build for the browser and Node.js: https://developer.wordpress.org/playground https://github.com/WordPress/wordpress-playground

(Disclosure: I'm the creator)

I love the work going on there at WasmLabs, especially enjoying the articles with in-depth technical explorations.

After the article about running WordPress in the browser was published, there's a new project called WordPress Playground which is gradually preparing NPM or Composer packages to make it easier for people to run it.

https://github.com/WordPress/wordpress-playground/

They've been doing very detailed work, like making some patches to PHP and SQLite for improved compatibility with Emscripten, etc. It seems there's a lot of overlap with what WasmLabs has achieved and probably have continued to develop further. Perhaps there's an opportunity for collaboration.

WordPress WASM\ (28 comments)

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/