Yes, there are places to find worse code, but this isn't what I would call clean, readable code.
Some of it feels like it was written with the goal of not pressing enter. Can I read it and debug it? Certainly. Do I want to? Certainly not.
Some of it feels like it was written with the goal of not pressing enter. Can I read it and debug it? Certainly. Do I want to? Certainly not.
On the “lock-in” concern: that’s a fair point. dagger.js is still young, and it’s reasonable to be cautious with any new project. One of the core goals, though, is low lock-in: your code is still just HTML + JS + Web Components. Even if dagger.js disappeared tomorrow, your markup would continue to work with minimal adjustments.
On code readability: you’re right that the current source is compact and not heavily commented. That was a stylistic choice early on to keep things lightweight, but I understand it can make debugging less inviting. Based on this feedback, I’m planning to provide a more readable version so others can more easily step in.
So the trade-off you mentioned is valid: fewer features, but less surface area and minimal lock-in. The feedback here helps me refine where the ergonomics stop and where maintainability needs more attention.
Thanks again for taking the time to review both the idea and the code — it makes the project better, and I’ll keep iterating with these points in mind.
The problem is that the nice feeling you get from writing it is inversely proportional to the nice feeling I have when reading it.