Well, bootstrap makes your front end responsive and add something more to it.
Moonjs um... I don't know I just felt the name was cool and it's not mainstream.
I'm not sure what non-isomorphic means but I choose non-js backend because I don't plan to deep dive in js that much I just want to learn it enough that it'll be sufficient for me to design frontend. I'll choose backend where java is used. And as for my mini Project (The main reason why I dived in the world of web dev) I'll use flask as it requires less time to learn. Also I am aiming for full stack developer but that'll eventually change to either front end or backend depending on my experience with them.
Also thanks for recommending solid I'll look into it. I wasn't aware of any other framework beside VUE, Angular, React and ajax
I get that it has many "components" that all change at the same viewport width media queries, but with flexbox and css grid there's a much lower barrier to entry than there used to be to make your own css responsive. On the other hand, if you don't want to design anything and just want to present your data/controls as soon as possible, you should grab a component-pack for your specific framework, like a Google Material Design or Ant Design one, that directly exports components in your frameworks format.
Oh, that was precisely my reaction, that it is very obscure, I barely heard about it. Certainly less than Angular, Elm, Svelte and Cycle.js. Also, if you are just looking around for variety, see lit-element and stencil.js, which produce Web Components.
I meant that you would have the same component code running on the server for server rendering and on the client for clientside rendering. Personally, I feel like server side rendering is overhyped, the cases when it's advantageous are fairly limited. Having a completely static homepage + clientside-rendered-only inner pages makes more sense.
Only if you are making something like a shop or Medium.com, with a lot of dynamic public content, would you want to render on the server to give new visitors that are following a deep link a fast experience.
However, if you do plan on pumping out dynamic HTML serverside, perhaps you should skip fully featured frameworks altogether, and use something like STIMULUS to just give your pages interactivity.
Also thanks for recommending solid I'll look into it. I wasn't aware of any other framework beside VUE, Angular, React and ajax
I get that it has many "components" that all change at the same viewport width media queries, but with flexbox and css grid there's a much lower barrier to entry than there used to be to make your own css responsive. On the other hand, if you don't want to design anything and just want to present your data/controls as soon as possible, you should grab a component-pack for your specific framework, like a Google Material Design or Ant Design one, that directly exports components in your frameworks format.
Oh, that was precisely my reaction, that it is very obscure, I barely heard about it. Certainly less than Angular, Elm, Svelte and Cycle.js. Also, if you are just looking around for variety, see lit-element and stencil.js, which produce Web Components.
I meant that you would have the same component code running on the server for server rendering and on the client for clientside rendering. Personally, I feel like server side rendering is overhyped, the cases when it's advantageous are fairly limited. Having a completely static homepage + clientside-rendered-only inner pages makes more sense.
Only if you are making something like a shop or Medium.com, with a lot of dynamic public content, would you want to render on the server to give new visitors that are following a deep link a fast experience.
However, if you do plan on pumping out dynamic HTML serverside, perhaps you should skip fully featured frameworks altogether, and use something like STIMULUS to just give your pages interactivity.
Thanks for providing information I'll do look into that