Hacker News Reader

Comment by drbw | Hacker News Reader

So pretty much the Blazor Server approach in the Dot Net world then?

Blazor Server and Blazor WebAssembly needs to be marketed separately. Most people have heard about Blazor WebAssembly but are unaware that LiveView-style web development is possible in the .Net world using Blazor Server.

Yes, yes they do. I don't know why you'd name pretty much the exact opposite techs the exact same thing.

I don't use Blazor, however when I went to get basic info about it every article I have read were very clear that there's 2 ways to dev a Blazor app.

It's also not unlike JSF in the Java world, which went out of fashion 10 or so years ago, and for good reason: relying on a framework to paper over the distinction between client and server side turned out to be much more complicated and fragile than a cleanly defined separation. I haven't seen any authors or users of these recently developed server-side-first frameworks discuss this prior art, but I'd be interested to see if they've come up with a way around what seemed like a fundamental problem in the approach.

As former JSF framework tech lead built on top of Richfaces, the major problem with JSF was its lifecycle model and the fact that Sun et al only defined the basic infrastructure and lead to a forest of frameworks that could hardly interoperate among themselves.

To the point that on my follow up project I ended up recomending for JSP with tag libraries instead, regardless of Sun advising them as deprecated and replaced by JSF.

WebForms never felt as complex as JSF.

I feel JSP like models with component libraries, or MVC are more closer approaches to the whole Web programming model.

Yes, basically. Fun fact: Blazor and LiveView were developed independently, around the same time as each other! Just two similar implementations in disparate communities.

Guess that was due to browser-land innovations that made this a possibility.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com