hello Javascript, oh how I've missed you

TL;DR

The author reflects on their brief experience with Go, HTMX, and Temple, ultimately preferring Next.js for development.

Transcript

so I feel kind of dumb making this video and I was honestly just going to like not even make this video and just let my slow transition back to nextjs but I figured maybe you all can just hear my perspective on the go htx journey I went on for two weeks so two weeks ago I made a video called goodbye Java Script it got a lot more views than I was ex... Read More

Key Insights

• ❓ The author appreciates Go's performance and error handling, but finds its verbosity and strictness challenging for rapid development.
• 🥺 Transitioning from JavaScript to Go introduced a steep learning curve, leading to feelings of frustration due to unfamiliar syntax and paradigms.
• 🖤 HTMX's approach to UI updates was found to lack the intuitive nature of state-driven frameworks, making it less maintainable for complex applications.
• ❤️‍🩹 The author recognizes the efficiency gained from staying within a single ecosystem, using JavaScript and TypeScript for both front-end and back-end work.
• 👻 Speed of prototyping is a significant factor in the author's development preferences, favoring frameworks that allow for flexibility in coding without cumbersome restrictions.
• 📑 The author experienced common issues like blocked tabs when using HTMX that negatively impacted their development experience, causing them to rethink its usability.
• 🥺 Overall developer experience was prioritized over raw performance in the author's assessment of web development frameworks, leading to a return to Next.js.

Questions & Answers

Q: What prompted the author's decision to explore Go and HTMX?

The author was inspired to explore Go and HTMX after their "Goodbye JavaScript" video garnered unexpected attention. They aimed to assess the potential advantages of Go’s performance and developer experiences in contrast to their established JavaScript background.

Q: What were some issues the author faced while coding in Go?

The author encountered frustrations such as Go's verbosity, particularly with string interpolation and error management. They found Go's error-handling paradigm more systematic but sometimes overly rigid, making quick prototyping less appealing when compared to JavaScript's more flexible error handling.

Q: How does the author view the HTMX framework?

The author was not impressed by HTMX, noting that maintaining state through backend-driven DOM swapping felt cumbersome compared to data-driven frameworks like React or Vue. They found that HTMX introduced complexities, especially in managing IDs and updating the UI, leading to inefficiency.

Q: What advantages of Next.js does the author emphasize?

The author praises Next.js for its integration of front-end and back-end development, allowing for rapid feature implementation without the complexity of juggling multiple ecosystems. They value the type safety and rich tooling provided by TypeScript within the Next.js framework.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• The author shares insights from their two-week experiment with Go and HTMX, expressing frustrations with the learning curve, verbosity, and complexity compared to their preferred Next.js environment.

• While acknowledging the performance benefits of Go, the author ultimately values developer experience, rapid prototyping, and flexibility found in JavaScript and TypeScript over the rigor of Go's structure.

• The feedback on HTMX highlights difficulties in managing state and maintaining code, leading the author to abandon it in favor of more familiar frameworks that support a reactive programming model.