I'm probably misunderstanding your comment and I think if you elaborate a little it might help.
My understanding is that very few sites (or apps) are NOT a fancy CRUD app.
I'm probably misunderstanding your comment and I think if you elaborate a little it might help.
My understanding is that very few sites (or apps) are NOT a fancy CRUD app.
Also, using libraries like htmx is actually more suitable for the type of work you’re describing than modern SPA frameworks with all the bloat they bring along. Non-SPA libraries play well with other libraries, rather than take over the entire rendering process.
I’m old enough to remember how things were before SPAs; with libraries like jQuery the Web loaded much faster and was actually more interactive than it is with the currently dominant paradigm.
That being said, having done all the job queues, API integrations and so forth you mention countless times, and having done graphics, AI/ML and symbolic stuff like compiler development, I can say confidently that at their best CRUD apps are still comparatively boring to write. I personally think it's a mistake to latch on and get religious with a stack that's going to leave you stranded on the isle of boring code.
With that said, some things that seem boring to you may be interesting to others. And I don’t see how tech stack is relevant; if building CRUD-ish apps, I want the best possible DX. Of course, if/when I venture out of my comfort zone I will need to learn a new stack, but React and Vue become even less relevant for me at that point.
I hear you, but I don't see how immersive games are limited without a CSS build step. Games in particular don't usually have a lot of CSS anyway.
As far as complex webapps go, I'm not thoroughly convinced that the dev team is limited by the lack of a CSS build step. Sure, it makes things slightly more tedious, but not that much more tedious, surely?