Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | crvst's commentslogin

Virtually every country in this region was drawn up by the British and French with little regard for ethnic or religious boundaries. What are you talking about?


Every single one of the countries is Persian, Arab, or Turkish with a big heaping of Islam


React is far from performant for SSR, and it simply can’t be, as it wasn’t designed with backend needs in mind. The fact that it works at all is more of a happy accident or side effect. Current approaches are more like workarounds than proper solutions for making it function effectively on servers.

Most importantly, it’s also not particularly performant on the client side in real-world scenarios.

For evidence, here’s a guy testing major websites using his awesome react-scan tool: https://x.com/aidenybai/status/1861442057598062653


Cannot agree more! Mastering React is ridiculously hard for what it is. There are so many “buts,” “it depends,” and subtle differences to navigate, like useEffect vs. useLayoutEffect. But don't forget useEffect is an evil in the first place and so on, and so on.

It feels like a clever proof of concept with a leaky abstraction at its core, one that no amount of effort can truly fix, no matter how much they throw at it. They’re even building their own compiler. A compiler. For something that’s supposed to represent the V in MVC.

As a SPA framework, it’s questionable. But using React to build server-side apps? That’s beyond absurd for me, it’s like Electron for the backend, only worse. And yet, the industry loves to pretend otherwise, so here we are.


React is a guided missile foot gun. You can figure out how to have it hit something else, but even when you aren’t pointing it at your foot, it’s probably going to hit your foot. You can have that feeling of wonder as the rocket sails off into the distance, and then just as you get customers, it comes back over the horizon and hits your foot. Experienced physicists and rocket scientists can override the guidance mechanism and have a much better chance of not hitting a foot, but who has time for that. Most people just like that it has a big red button labeled “Shoot” that’s easy to press.


You shouldn't write a single useEffect in the first year or two of your career in React.

Why people are so keen on stabbing themselves just because there's one or two weird shaped forks in the kitchen drawer. Why do suddenly everyone tries to use it for spreading butter or peeling eggs?

Just understand what unidirectional data flow is and you are golden. You know the entirety of React you should be using for your first year of full-time job.


That’s true. Just to note, I never claimed otherwise. See, useEffect is an evil remark. This is more based on my experience working with an average React codebase.

As for your question, “Why does everyone suddenly try to use it for spreading butter or peeling eggs?”

I guess part of the reason is that many people rely on older tutorials and patterns where the usage of useEffect was much more tolerated or even encouraged as a catch-all solution. There’s still a lot of inertia from the old componentDidThis/componentDidThat paradigm, with useEffect being its direct replacement.

I feel it is only a recent tendency to finally abandon the overuse of effect hooks.

Just open an average Stack Overflow React question, and you’ll see how many useEffects are crammed in there.


How do you fetch and persist server side data without useEffect? (Assuming vanilla react)


That’s probably the main real-world use case for useEffect. Dedicated third-party libraries like React Query obviously use useEffect under the hood as well


Yeah that's what I thought -- all the React codebases that I've worked in are riddled with `useEffect` for this reason primarily.


I'm jealous, then. I've seen all kinds of deranged Rube Goldberg machines built using useEffect


Rubber is not a plastic


Most tires are not made from natural rubber, but from synthetics.


Yet, it is still not literally a plastic by definition. I feel the term “plastic” is already demonized enough, and now it often serves as a generic umbrella term for alarmist purposes.


How are you defining plastic that synthetic tires don't fit the definition?


Plastics are rigid, while rubber (elastomers) is elastic.

You might say this is nitpicking, but not everything that's potentially harmful in its dispersed form is plastic. Asbestos, coal dust, and sand dust are not plastics.

For me, it's like calling any shiny metal 'silver' or calling any clear stone a 'diamond' - they may look similar, but they're completely different materials.


Ah. Got it. You're talking about rigid plastics. Not all plastics are rigid. Polyester and nylon are frequently spun into thin fibers so they are flexible for clothing, and plastic bags are a thing. Plastic lids are frequently flexible so you can actually put them in the container. Rigid plastics are not the only kind that exist.


Sorry, it just sounds like a seemingly reasonable and eloquent, yet highly emotional speculation.

“There,” “here,” psychological obliteration—what is this but sciency reasoning, on par with boomers claiming, “Games make kids violent”?

“Your entire whole self is destroyed.” Jeez.


Is the OP using terms of art?


"Leave the multibillion dollar company alone!"


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: