News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:State is hard: why SPAs will persist by icedchai on Sunday May 29, 2022 @03:08PM (#31551892)
It’s very common in poorly engineered SPAs. “Built in” browser functionality often has to be reimplemented.
Re:State is hard: why SPAs will persist by Mo3 on Sunday May 29, 2022 @03:24PM (#31552032)
Bad developers are still not a valid argument against SPAs.
Re:State is hard: why SPAs will persist by RHSeeger on Sunday May 29, 2022 @03:31PM (#31552093)
If it is more common for functionality to be broken in an SPA than in a non-SPA, then that most certainly _is_ a valid argument against SPAs (from a user perspective). It's not an argument that all SPAs are bad. Rather, that I prefer non-SPA implementations because I can generally assume that it will have fewer bugs/annoyances in using it.
Re:State is hard: why SPAs will persist by Taywee on Sunday May 29, 2022 @03:54PM (#31552317)
Why not? "You have to reimplement a huge amount of current and future behaviors that just work for MPAs" is definitely an argument against SPAs. That's extra work, extra potential for bugs, extra potential for accessibility problems.
Re:State is hard: why SPAs will persist by layer8 on Sunday May 29, 2022 @04:55PM (#31552798)
It sort-of is if bad developers are less likely to wreck havoc with MPAs. Also, I don’t think that back-button breakage automatically indicates incompetent developers (although I tend to swear at them).
Re:State is hard: why SPAs will persist by dempseye on Sunday May 29, 2022 @06:34PM (#31553553)
That's like saying bad trapeze artists are not a valid argument for safety nets.