The Case for React-Like Web Components

Re:The Case for React-Like Web Components by sametmax on Thursday February 01, 2018 @10:32AM (#16282517)

Yep. Fetch is very low level. Chaining is a godsend. Adding elements is way shorter with jquery. All the vanilla js project i've seen end up writting a poormy tested a'd documeted half backed jquery little brother. It's not a win.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Case for React-Like Web Components by sebringj on Thursday February 01, 2018 @11:09AM (#16282910)

I like fetch except its missing xhr basic stuff like cancel and abort, etc. I don't know who makes these standards.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Case for React-Like Web Components by realityking on Thursday February 01, 2018 @11:35AM (#16283192)

Abort/cancel has recently been added to the spec as AbortSigal (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/AbortSignal). Currently only supported in Firefox 57 and Edge 16.

The major thing still missing is upload/download progress.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Case for React-Like Web Components by sebringj on Sunday February 04, 2018 @02:40PM (#16304450)

In remembering this issue I had, I made a frankenstein promise return object mimicking fetch's interface called "retch" but didn't publish it. It allowed progress and cancelling. It made me think would be nice to have a promise interface standard class you could inherit from where you could add sugar to it so the chain would remain consistent with your additional functionality. Anyhoo.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:The Case for React-Like Web Components by vinceguidry on Thursday February 01, 2018 @10:49AM (#16282680)

I have a open job application with a company whose code challenge has me using vanilla Javascript. I'm not enthused about finishing it.

[ Parent | on HN ]