54
top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 1 points 48 seconds ago

We’ve been adding mountains of JS to “feel” fast, while making everything slower.

I disagree that that is a bad thing. I’m not providing evidence here, so disagree if you wish. In my opinion, users don’t care if something is fast. They don’t take out stopwatches to time the page transitions. They care if something feels fast. They want the web page to react immediately when they issue an action, and have the impression that they’re not waiting for too long. Feeling fast is way more important than being fast, even if the feeling comes at a performance hit.

It takes about 120ms for a human to detect (not react to) a stimulus [1] (For the gamers: That’s 4FPS). So if you page responds to a user action in that time frame, it feels instantaneous.

If you want to try it yourself, paste this code into your browser console. Then click anywhere on the page and see if the delay of 125ms feels annoying to you.

let isBlack = true;
document.body.addEventListener('mousedown', () => {
  setTimeout(() => {
    document.body.style.backgroundColor = isBlack ? 'red' : 'black'
    isBlack = !isBlack
  }, 125)
})

[1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4374455/

[-] 0xDREADBEEF@programming.dev 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

If only "fullstack" or "typescript" devs weren't so scared of CSS. They can optimize a weird join, they know the Big O notation of a function that operates on a list that'll never ever exceed a size of like 1000 items so who the fuck cares, but as soon as you ask them about grid, layers, container queries, or even what things like houdini can hopefully do one day, they just collectively shit themselves.

What corporations and enterprise software development practices have done to the web makes me crash out, sorry. Very few people who actually care about CSS are making a living wage making things with it as their job.

[-] Philamand@jlai.lu 4 points 7 hours ago
[-] Hirom@beehaw.org 2 points 6 hours ago

What would happen on unsupported browsers?

Hopefully the page would load just as well, but the transition would be less smooth.

If that allows the website to render fast, without JS, on all browsers then it's more than worth it.

[-] Philamand@jlai.lu 4 points 4 hours ago

Yes, firefox users would just miss the transitions until it's added to the browser. It's absolutely worth it, as JavaScript frameworks use have gone out of hand as the article says...

[-] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 12 points 16 hours ago

Maybe I missed it, but how do I share state between page transitions? For instance, I’m currently displaying a user list. How do I carry the user over to the details page without re-fetching it, and more interestingly, without re-instantiating the User instance from the data?

I imagine (though I’m the first to admit that I don’t know every modern API by heart) I would have to move the user to local storage before allowing the browser to navigate. That sounds annoying, since I’m either persisting the whole user list, or I need to check which link the user clicked, prevent the navigation, store the relevant user, and then navigate manually.

With an SPA the user list just lives in a JS variable. When I’m on the user’s details page, I just find the relevant user in that list without even making another HTTP request.

[-] brian@programming.dev 2 points 19 minutes ago

in your case the user list would be rendered by the server and the client wouldn't care, it would receive a new rendered copy when you changed pages.

it seems like their argument was all just sites that should have been fully static to begin with, and for some reason have made it sound like that's the main use of SPAs. It's a silly article and I wouldn't change anything I'm doing based on it. if your site is a content based site(showing docs/articles/etc.) then you shouldn't be using an SPA, especially just for page transitions. otherwise you have a valid use for an SPA and should continue regardless of these new APIs

[-] madcaesar@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago

SPAs are just fine.

Web dev is a never-ending cycle of people "well actuallying" constantly to invent new shit, which will be "well actuallyied" 2 weeks later.

[-] sekki@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago

I get what you are asking for but I don't think it is even necessary to have a list of users on the client in the first place using the MPA approach. I would guess the list of users is just available to the server, which pre-renders HTML out of it and provides it to the client.

[-] bleistift2@sopuli.xyz 1 points 15 minutes ago* (last edited 13 minutes ago)

So we’re back to fully static pages and rendering HTML on the server? That sounds like a terrible idea. I don’t want to preload 10 different pages (for opening various filtering forms, creation forms, more pages of the user list, different lengths of the user list, different orderings of the list, and all combinations of the above) just in case a user needs one of them, which they mostly don’t.

[-] Ephera@lemmy.ml 22 points 1 day ago

This would've been a much more exciting article, if it was actually supported across the web and not just in Chromium...

[-] ViatorOmnium@piefed.social 18 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

It's already on Safari and Firefox Nightly too.

this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2025
54 points (92.2% liked)

Web Development

4360 readers
63 users here now

Welcome to the web development community! This is a place to post, discuss, get help about, etc. anything related to web development

What is web development?

Web development is the process of creating websites or web applications

Rules/Guidelines

Related Communities

Wormhole

Some webdev blogsNot sure what to post in here? Want some web development related things to read?

Heres a couple blogs that have web development related content

CreditsIcon base by Delapouite under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS