←back to thread

Less Htmx Is More

(unplannedobsolescence.com)
169 points fanf2 | 1 comments | 08 Apr 25 08:42 UTC | HN request time: 0.209s | source
Show context
throw10920 ◴[08 Apr 25 11:18 UTC] No.43620387[source]▶
While I get the emotional appeal, I still don't understand the use-case for htmx. If you're making a completely static page, you just use HTML. If you're making a dynamic page, then you want to push as much logic to the client as possible because far more users are latency-limited than compute-limited (compare [1] vs [2]), so you use normal frontend technologies. Mixing htmx and traditional frontend tech seems like it'd result in extra unnecessary complexity. What's the target audience?

Edit: "Normal/traditional frontend" here means both vanilla (HTML+JS+CSS) and the most popular frameworks (React, Angular, Vue, Next).

[1] https://danluu.com/slow-device/

[2] https://danluu.com/web-bloat/

replies(9): >>43620401 #>>43620449 #>>43620467 #>>43620547 #>>43620624 #>>43620674 #>>43621160 #>>43621499 #>>43621641 #
1. loloquwowndueo ◴[08 Apr 25 11:44 UTC] No.43620547[source]▶
You should read the htmx “book” (https://hypermedia.systems/ ) where the use case is clearly explained. It advocates for using htmx to enhance a page with more interactivity by extending html semantics and behaviours a bit (thus requiring minimum effort and learning curve) and move to more heavyweight client-side front end stuff (react and friends) if more interactivity or complex behaviours are needed.

You can whip up a simple html form and spruce it up with htmx so it feels “modern” to current users, with little effort and changes and importantly without having to learn the insanity that are modern front end stacks. Not only curmudgeons from the 90s like me benefit from this!