Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Honest question : explain your disagreement with Facebook's JSX #2

Closed
DjebbZ opened this issue Jan 4, 2016 · 2 comments
Closed

Honest question : explain your disagreement with Facebook's JSX #2

DjebbZ opened this issue Jan 4, 2016 · 2 comments

Comments

@DjebbZ
Copy link

DjebbZ commented Jan 4, 2016

Hello,

In the README, you say disagree with http://facebook.github.io/jsx/#why-not-template-literals. Can you give more details ? I'm questioning the pros and cons of JSX, template literals and simple functions. Your input could be valuable in my reflexion.

Thanks in advance !

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jan 4, 2016

JSX isn't part of the javascript language, so it always requires special configuration and extra tooling to work properly. Often, these extra tools and configuration are built around a particular stack, like react, which makes it more difficult to use them in isolation. Configuring jsx tools to support non-react options like virtual-dom/main-loop (which I like better) was more difficult than it ought to be. With less coupled tooling, we can experiment more freely and arrive on better solutions.

With a tagged template string function, you can pass in any configuration details and argument in your code instead of configuring your build pipeline, which I think is much more flexible and you can use template strings natively in node without any compile steps.

The argument on facebook's page about jsx is that the ${} is too awkward compared to {} and that this would somehow create divergence. I think this is a silly argument.

@ghost ghost closed this as completed Jan 4, 2016
@DjebbZ
Copy link
Author

DjebbZ commented Jan 4, 2016

Thanks a lot.

This issue was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant