I think that his comment is just too harsh on React. Yes, it is the most popular library to code web stuff right now, but we all know where was Angular a few years ago, and Meteor and Ember before it. Libs/Frameworks come and go, and that usually happens with the web itself evolving and making easier to create stuff without framework overhead. In my opinion, React will embrace Web Components as soon as we start to see professional and big web applications created with WC because they have a similar ideology. There are a few problems remaining to be solved as WC are using custom HTML tags and as @benny
mentioned a different approach to handling browser events.
After reading his comment, a reader might get the opinion that React is slowly dying, but React will not go anywhere anytime soon (MS is rewriting Skype in React, and XBOX will use React Native, among other stuff happening in React world) :) I've taken a look at WC and they are still not ready for production, but it's a very good thing to know nevertheless, who knows when you might need it :)
See my comments about v0 vs v1 specs re: youtube. tl:dr; it's a straw man.
Also, edge can be polyfilled so wcs are supported on edge, it just won't be as performant as other browsers for a release cycle or two. No biggie.
I've been using ff as my daily driver since 57, including youtube (polyfilled) and it's really not as huge a performance thing as it's made out to be.
There are plenty of big sites out there using wcs. ING, wego, ea, others. Every McDonald's menu runs Polymer. People cite the youtube thing, but youtube is using the v0 specs with polyfills (soon chrome will also require polyfills for those old deprecated specs), so when people point to yt and say it doesn't work, it's a straw man (see my original comments)
Your take is fair and restrained, btw. My own feelings at this point are that it's impossible to be too harsh about React. React's smug, myopic fanbase made me seriously consider quitting web development for the first time in my decade+ long career.
But that's not all React users, all React fans, or all React's core team. It's just the zeitgeist and a particularly loud, obnoxious, and ignorant segment of the fanbase. So I try to take deep breaths and avoid getting involved in fruitless debate.
Sorry about your bad experiences. If there's something we could do to improve it please feel free to reach out in Twitter DMs.
I'm tempted to return that dollar you just loaned me. But I'll be charitable. Despite this being the stock response of React core team members, you all probably don't mean to pass the buck of the responsibility that comes with your power along to me, a person without your power and the experience (of what's feasible) that comes with it. I genuinely believe you mean it literally and kindly. It's understandable. We put things out into the world and really lose control over what other people make of them. You are an engineer, not a sociologist or a public relations professional. If I were you, I wouldn't know what to do, either. Which is to say: it sucks, I don't know what to do, and I don't blame you for not knowing either. So I'll definitely let you know if I do have any ideas.
Have you considered psychotherapy to help with your anger and frustration, which is likely due to increasing feelings of irrelevance with regards to your skillset, rather than anything to do with the actual tech?
Hey, Dan! Jack here's a perfect example of what I'm talking about.
Yay I'm an example!
Hey folks, let's remember we talking about technology here, not atomic warfare.
We all have strong opinions on the subject, but I hope we'll find a way to express them without belittling each other personally.
How come I don't see more articles about WC then? Where is WC community? Does it have some sort of ecosystem of packages and utilities?
For now, it seems just like some niche tech like Haskell, Dart, Elm, and Clojure, everyone is talking about them and admire them but I haven't seen a single practical use in production applications except for a few exceptions. Companies and corps are usually going after something that is battle tested, and once WC are battle tested with a bunch of really good examples, I'm sure we will use a new framework based on WC as usual.
That's what I came up with just off my fingertips. But also, when was the last time you attended a querySelectorConf?
so I'd like to suggest that the reason you don't see more is because you're not looking hard enough ;)
To be fair, my oft-repeated complaint in the Polymer Community Slack is that not enough resources are being directed to advocacy and community building. Lately I've been hearing subterranean rumblings that the situation on that front might improve.
I think the point was about "niche" not existance as such. Although there might be a ton of resources out there, I too believe it is not - let's say - well marketed.
On the other hand, I see this fruitful discussion as an opportunity for me, to take a look at what exactly WC are - if that was intended: mission accomplished 😄
I have a dark fuzzy image of it which eventually needs some details.
But anyway: the point of not having a querySelector conf is, that I suspect it being common shared knowledge in contrast to not so common knowledge about WC.
There are plenty of resources about WebComponents. Nearly none of them are about WebComponents though. They are about Polymer. Or Stencil. Or lit-html. Or...
There's a Polymer summit. I don't think there's a Web Components conference.
It's probably the first time in the history of web standards that the new "use the platform" and the new "use the APIs" are rarely if ever mentioned in any of the resources dedicated to them.
People keep mentioning jQuery. However, as the platform develops, there's less and less need for jQuery (querySelector, fetch, etc.). The platform developed to include WebComponents, and they somehow don't reduce the need for libraries. Instead, they all but require libraries to be even remotely usable.
And that is specifically because of a new trend in web standards about which I have mixed feelings.
Specifically, more low level APIs intended to be consumed less by web client developers directly and more by web tool/framework developers.
The idea is that web standards will be able to move faster and satisfy real (vs imagined) needs better if there is more dialogue with "userland" solutions. I get the impression they don't want to spend a lot of time on API usability only to find there are major problems with or no value in the essential features. (For example, almost a decade was arguably wasted on XML as a way to extend HTML, while multiple frameworks found their own ways to do it and thereby also uncovered a dozen OTHER needs in the platform.)
So there's definitely SOME inaccuracy to the framing of using the platform being about not using libraries at all. But honestly I think this argument usually involves people talking past each other, not with each other.
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
We strive for transparency and don't collect excess data.