this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2024
471 points (94.2% liked)

Programmer Humor

31224 readers
48 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] foobaz 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don't agree with this hard split between SPAs and MPAs anymore (ie. SPAs for apps, MPAs for websites/content). In my opinion SPAs are simply a progressive enhancement for MPAs which allow even faster page navigation. All frameworks now come with SSR solutions and if a website still requires JS to show content that's a skill issue.

Looking at Astro the line between SPA/MPA is getting really blurry. Just slap a View Transition element on your page and you got a MPA which acts like a SPA when JS is enabled.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

In my opinion SPAs are simply a progressive enhancement for MPAs which allow even faster page navigation.

While I agree that there is a spectrum (hinting at that with the last paragraph), this is where I hard disagree. To construct something like this, you are making an application massively complex by trying to re-implement everything on both ends. Using something like Astro is only hiding that complexity but it’s still there, & probably full of bugs & tons of JavaScript that most developers wouldn’t even understand their stack or know how to jump into the Astro code. The amount of time saved is largely minuscule in most cases with the assets cached when navigating to a new page. In fact, I just tested two of their showcased sites which loaded slower with JavaScript enabled & the content was pretty obviously 95% static. There’s probably some niche use cases for this, but it’s not a good default IMO.