SolidJS is a declarative JavaScript UI library emphasizing performance through fine-grained reactivity. It compiles to real DOM nodes and uses explicit reactive primitives, avoiding the virtual DOM overhead common in other frameworks. This approach results in efficient updates, minimal memory usage, and excellent performance, particularly for complex and dynamic applications. SolidJS also offers features like JSX templating, server-side rendering, and a compact API, making it a powerful and efficient alternative for building user interfaces.
Pledge is a lightweight reactive programming framework for Swift designed to be simpler and more performant than RxSwift. It aims to provide a more accessible entry point to reactive programming by offering a reduced API surface, focusing on core functionalities like observables, operators, and subjects. Pledge avoids the overhead associated with RxSwift, leading to improved compile times and runtime performance, particularly beneficial for smaller projects or those where resource constraints are a concern. The framework embraces Swift's concurrency features, enabling seamless integration with async/await for modern Swift development. Its goal is to offer the benefits of reactive programming without the complexity and performance penalties often associated with larger frameworks.
HN commenters generally expressed skepticism towards Pledge's performance claims, particularly regarding the "no Rx overhead" assertion. Several pointed out the difficulty of truly eliminating the overhead associated with reactive programming patterns and questioned whether a simpler approach using Combine, Swift's built-in reactive framework, wouldn't be preferable. Some questioned the need for another reactive framework in the Swift ecosystem given the existing mature options. A few users showed interest in the project, acknowledging the desire for a lighter-weight alternative to Combine, but emphasized the need for robust benchmarks and comparisons to substantiate performance claims. There was also discussion about the project's name and potential trademark issues with Adobe's Pledge image format.
Steve Losh's blog post explores leveraging the Common Lisp Object System (CLOS) for dependency management within Lisp applications. Instead of relying on external systems, Losh advocates using CLOS's built-in dependent maintenance protocol to automatically track and update derived values based on changes to their dependencies. He demonstrates this by creating a depending macro that simplifies defining these dependencies and automatically invalidates cached values when necessary. This approach offers a tightly integrated, efficient, and inherently Lisp-y solution to dependency tracking, reducing the need for external libraries or complex build processes. By handling dependencies within the language itself, this technique enhances code clarity and simplifies the overall development workflow.
Hacker News users discussed the complexity of Common Lisp's dependency system, particularly its use of the CLOS dependent maintenance protocol. Some found the system overly complex for simple tasks, arguing simpler dependency tracking mechanisms would suffice. Others highlighted the power and flexibility of CLOS for managing complex dependencies, especially in larger projects. The discussion also touched on the trade-offs between declarative and imperative approaches to dependency management, with some suggesting a hybrid approach could be beneficial. Several commenters appreciated the blog post for illuminating a lesser-known aspect of Common Lisp. A few users expressed interest in exploring other dependency management solutions within the Lisp ecosystem.
Svelte 5 focuses on becoming smaller, faster, and simpler. It achieves this through aggressive optimization strategies like compile-time dead code elimination and reduced reliance on runtime helpers, resulting in significantly smaller bundle sizes. This "vanishing framework" approach allows Svelte to prioritize performance and developer experience by shifting more work to the compiler. Rich Harris discusses the future of frameworks, emphasizing a trend towards this disappearing act, where frameworks become less noticeable at runtime. He also touches on the increasing importance of interoperability between frameworks and the potential for component-level adoption. Svelte 5's changes are not just about immediate improvements, but represent a commitment to a long-term vision for streamlined and performant web development.
Hacker News users discussed Svelte 5's new features, particularly the reactivity improvements and reduced bundle size. Some expressed excitement about the direction Svelte is taking, praising its developer experience and performance. Others questioned the long-term viability of compiled frameworks and debated the merits of Svelte's approach compared to React or other established frameworks. Several commenters also brought up the importance of interoperability and the potential challenges of adopting a newer framework. A few users mentioned their positive experiences migrating to Svelte and highlighted the speed of development and small application size. Some skepticism was expressed about the limited server-side rendering capabilities and the relatively small community compared to React.
Summary of Comments ( 137 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43734911
Hacker News commenters generally expressed positive sentiment towards SolidJS, praising its performance, small bundle size, and resemblance to React's functional components with JSX. Several pointed out its efficient use of fine-grained reactivity, comparing it favorably to Svelte's compiled approach and noting its potential for better performance in complex updates. Some questioned its relatively smaller community and ecosystem compared to React or Vue, but acknowledged its growing popularity. A few experienced users shared positive anecdotes about using Solid in production, highlighting its speed and ease of debugging. Some discussion revolved around its similarity to KnockoutJS, with some suggesting Solid as a modern successor. There was also interest in its server-side rendering capabilities and potential for broader adoption.
The Hacker News thread linked discusses SolidJS, a reactive JavaScript library for building user interfaces. The discussion is fairly active with a variety of perspectives on the framework.
Several commenters praise Solid's performance, often comparing it favorably to React, Vue, and Svelte. One commenter highlights Solid's efficient use of fine-grained reactivity, arguing that it leads to better performance, especially in complex applications. They appreciate that updates are very targeted and don't cause unnecessary re-renders. Another user echoes this sentiment, emphasizing Solid's ability to surgically update the DOM, which they see as a key advantage. This theme of performance and efficiency appears repeatedly in the thread, establishing it as a core strength perceived by many commenters.
Some discussion revolves around the learning curve of Solid. While some find it relatively easy to grasp, particularly those coming from a React background, others note the need to adjust to its unique reactivity model. One commenter mentions the initial hurdle of understanding Signals, Solid's core reactive primitive, but emphasizes that the effort pays off in terms of performance gains. Another user points out the potential confusion stemming from Solid's use of JSX, which while similar to React's, has subtle differences in how it handles reactivity.
The topic of developer tooling and ecosystem maturity also comes up. One commenter expresses a desire for better debugging tools tailored specifically for Solid's reactive system. Others acknowledge that while the ecosystem is smaller than React's or Vue's, it is growing steadily. There's a mention of Solid's relatively small bundle size, which is seen as a benefit for performance and initial load times.
A few comments touch upon the comparison between Solid and Svelte. One user highlights the difference in their compilation strategies, noting that Svelte compiles components into highly optimized vanilla JavaScript, while Solid relies on its runtime reactivity system. Another commenter suggests that Solid's approach might offer more flexibility in certain scenarios.
Several users appreciate Solid's commitment to staying small and focused, contrasting it with the larger, more feature-rich frameworks like React. They see this as a positive aspect, believing it leads to a more maintainable and understandable codebase. Finally, the creator of SolidJS, Ryan Carniato, actively participates in the thread, answering questions and addressing concerns raised by commenters. His involvement is appreciated by the community and contributes to a productive discussion.