News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Rewriting the Ruby Parser by LapsangGuzzler on Tuesday June 13, 2023 @12:21PM (#36312507)
> I don't know why, there are tons of smaller companies using it.

Longtime rails dev here. The reason smaller companies are using it is because you can move much faster working on a full stack rails app that gives you SPA-like functionality without needing to incur the performance or operational cost of a dedicated front end.

I've worked for both rails shops and JS shops, and the productivity achieved with Rails is staggering compared to React in a small team environment. Guillermo Rauch tweeted a few months back that SPAs were a zero interest-rate phenomenon and I completely agree. Just because a bunch of companies jumped on the JS hype train doesn't mean that they were all making the right decision.

Re:Rewriting the Ruby Parser by pcthrowaway on Tuesday June 13, 2023 @01:40PM (#36313780)
> Guillermo Rauch tweeted a few months back that SPAs were a zero interest-rate phenomenon

Guillermo Rauch is selling Vercel, whose strategy includes first-class tooling for SSR, convincing people to move their SPA to SSR, and then locking them in on their platform.

Re:Rewriting the Ruby Parser by LapsangGuzzler on Tuesday June 13, 2023 @02:18PM (#36314449)
Sure, he's trying to create a business that I'm not particularly interested in being tied down as well. That doesn't make him wrong about SPA.
Re:Rewriting the Ruby Parser by Rauchg on Tuesday June 13, 2023 @03:13PM (#36315381)
Except my preference for SSR as the default dates as far back as 2014 and is rooted in the laws of physics[1] Downloading an empty shell, downloading code to render a bunch of spinners, to then incur in a bunch of waterfalls of data and more code to the server is not gonna make it.

[1] https://rauchg.com/2014/7-principles-of-rich-web-application...

Re:Rewriting the Ruby Parser by pcthrowaway on Tuesday June 13, 2023 @04:18PM (#36316401)
I mean those are fair points, though respectfully I think there are cases for SPAs where SSR won't do. But that's not what we're talking about.

Referring to SPAs as a "zero-interest-rate phenomenon" implies that SSG/SSR models are more efficient in terms of financial cost of deployment. I don't agree this is necessarily the case, and I think SPAs can be developed and deployed sanely and cheaply also.

Vercel is doing some amazing things, but it's also innovating in ways that occasionally lead to "lock-in", in the sense that moving away from Vercel would involve a lot of friction. So I think it's fair to point out that you have a financial interest in convincing people to adopt delivery models that your business streamlines.