> Hooks are only 5 years old

7. Worth saying that React really only took off 9-10 years ago, so hooks are damn near the beginning of time for _most_ react devs.

> The docs were revamped 2 years ago and there's lots of dead links to the old docs page which has a scary warning "These docs are old and won’t be updated.

IMO those are not dead links. A link is 'dead' if it links to a page that doesn't exist. Links to old pages with warnings are appropriate in many cases. Many projects are using older versions of react, and devs need to look up info. Not sure this should be seen as a problem.

> Create-react-app was deprecated in February of this year and in their blog post they tell you to use frameworks like Next.js.

Not sure why this is a problem. A very early tool got deprecated, and the react docs recommend the current paradigm. It's not like they're changing their getting started guidance every month, or even every year.

> Remix is now react router v7

If this is a bitch fest about React, then the react docs and CRA are fair game, but remix isn't IMO.

None of these are problems taken separately, but put together they're pretty frustrating. Hooks being 5 years old and being the predominant tool for certain tasks shows that the community only figured out how to solve a particular problem 5 years ago. Compare that, in terms of stability, to Python having coming up with the idea of packages a long time ago, and packages are now a stable part of the ecosystem (packaging is another story which I'll get to shortly).

Revamping the docs is not a problem by itself, but take a look at Python or Django, their docs have the same look and feel for older versions of the code. It's totally a minor problem, and if it were the only one I wouldn't be complaining here, but with the plethora of problems it starts to feel like death by a thousand papercuts.

> Create-react-app was deprecated

Going back to Python packaging, while it's much better than C/C++ packaging, people still love to complain about it! That said, pip is not deprecated. For React to just abandon the idea of helping users to create a project and telling them to "go bother someone else about it" does not seems like something a stable ecosystem would do.

> If this is a bitch fest about React, then the react docs and CRA are fair game, but remix isn't IMO.

It absolutely is a bitch fest about React because I inherited a simple site that should have never used React in the first place and it makes it so hard to do simple things without reinventing the wheel, but anyway, I'd say the ecosystem is fair game now that CRA is deprecated and the docs themselves tell you to go to Next or Vite or React Router or Tanstack.

Anyway, the point is that while React might be relatively stable from the point of view of the larger javascript ecosystem, it's still way less stable than it should be and way less stable than browser APIs.

> None of these are problems taken separately, but put together they're pretty frustrating. Hooks being 5 years old and being the predominant tool for certain tasks shows that the community only figured out how to solve a particular problem 5 years ago.

Hooks are ~~7~~ 6 years+8months old, almost 7 years. This may not seem like a significant difference, but IMO it puts them 75% of the way back in time to when react took off versus 50% of the way. That is a significant difference. Please stop repeating the 5 year number. It's _provably_ wrong and not a matter of opinion: https://legacy.reactjs.org/blog/2019/02/06/react-v16.8.0.htm...

> does not seems like something a stable ecosystem would do.

I don't think being a 'stable ecosystem' means owning every part of the dev process, or even most of it; nor have they ever intended to do so (they didn't reimplement npm, webpack, etc). CRA existed to fill a particular need for a time (providing a simpler/more stable interface in front of webpack), and when that was no longer needed by the community, they abandoned it. I don't understand why this matters. Better tools emerged, the React docs/guidance reflect that.

> because I inherited a simple site that should have never used React

I'm sorry that you're in that situation. The React community is not really responsible for that IMO, and I don't think the things you've highlighted have meaningfully contributed to making that worse. I stand by the fact that deprecating CRA once great alternatives emerged was the right answer. Next is probably a good answer for many people too. The react team is and should be writing recommendations for the common case for their library, and the fact that your simple site falls outside of an ideal case for React doesn't mean they're not writing the correct recommendations.

> Hooks are ~~7~~ 6 years+8months old, almost 7 years. This may not seem like a significant difference, but IMO it puts them 75% of the way back in time to when react took off versus 50% of the way.

I don't disagree with your overall point here, but if you're going to be super nitpicky and pedantic about this, then you can't call 6 years and 8 months 75% of 10 years.

Saying hooks is "seven years old" is just being pedantic. I worked on a major project in 2019 where making the decision to use hooks was a huge leap of faith. It did not become the default way of writing React code until 2020/2021, so five years is more than accurate enough.

- Dan Abramov's first big conference talk was in October 2018

- The official release was in React 16.8, February 2019 - that's six years ago

While we're keeping score, document.getElementById came out in 2000 [1] and XmlHttpRequest was standardized by mid-2000s [2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Document_Object_Model

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XMLHttpRequest

> Hooks are only 5 years old.

That is a long damn time in this industry, and class-based components still work just fine.

I preferred class based components. The pretend functional programming style of hooks is quite imperative when you prick a little beneath the surface, so classes were probably the right abstraction.

The problem with classes that hooks helped with was how hard it was to add multiple, reusable bits of lifecycle functionality. In even a medium size codebase I'd find myself having to reason about how to combine behavior A with behavior B in the onComponentWillWhatever methods. Hooks are weird but much much easier to compose and share.

I'm gonna be honest, I've been developing with react for about 9 years across a lot of projects and companies. I've never used next.

Maybe I'm out of touch, but I don't understand why people think it's so tightly could with the ecosystem

There is a large amount of what _might_ be described as astroturfing on the part of vercel to push Next. More charitably, vercel/the next community publishes a very large number of good tutorials/boilerplates/etc that are built on top of next.js.

If you check the docs for how to create a react app the first thing they recommend is to use next.js.

Oh interesting - I haven't been on their starting page in years. I'm surprised getting started with vite isn't higher up. That takes 5 minutes and doesn't require a full framework.

That said, starting with react router or expo is probably the right call depending on the project needs. Routing is not something you want to do yourself, and react native is pretty unfriendly without expo

Most of your complaints are about things that are not React. Those are optional. I can still standup a vanilla React stack in an afternoon just as easily as I did 5 years ago and immediately start writing the exact same code and have it "just work".

I’d argue it’s easier than ever today, thanks to Vite