alt Hacker NewsI always love seeing more done in the web component space. I think Lit has the no build process captured pretty well and they include things such as a router.
I do prefer the style of of your components more, where you separate out the script and styles with html tags. I don't know if one way or the other is superior for performance, I but just like the separation verse the templated strings in Lit.
With build tools being so straightforward now-a-days, I struggle to see the value in the build less approach. One use case I can think of is maybe a constrained environment where the application contains some kind of customizable user components fully in the browser like a reporting WYSIWIG of some kind.
Is there a particular reason you prefer this approach?
Replies
> Is there a particular reason you prefer this approach?
Compared to Lit? Firstly, I like Lit. My approach is better for me because there are far fewer things to know in order to create a reusable object and there are far fewer things to know in order to use an existing object.
IOW, my approach trades off functionality in favour of a lower cognitive burden for me. I just wanted something that had the minimum functionality I need - create an object and then reuse it. For me, anything outside of that goal is peripheral burden that I'd rather not get bogged down in.
I agree with many here that this is not an approach for them, maybe even for most, but I am certain that if I find something useful that increases my velocity of feature delivery, then maybe someone else will as well.
One major benefit of not having a build process is that you can make changes and instantly see the result without delay.
With the caveat that I’m generally outside of the web dev sphere aside from casual tinkering: no build process means no setup and one fewer thing that can break. That’s valuable in itself.