joystick

You may dig what I've built, then [1][2]. [1] https://cheatcode.co/joystick [2] https://github.com/cheatcode/joystick

If you want a simple but powerful full-stack JS framework (literally, client and server are separated as they should be—no trickery) that is being built carefully and slowly, check out Joystick [1][2]. To put it in simple terms: if Next.js is the hare, Joystick is the tortoise. It uses plain HTML, CSS, and JS for components (no React, Vue, Svelte, etc.—just simple components any skill-level can grok) in an easy-to-learn API and pairs that with a batteries-included Node.js back-end built on top of Express. The server automatically does old fashioned server-side rendering in routes (literally a callback function mapped to a URL pattern w/ req and res objects). This is not "just another JS framework." I intentionally designed it to not behave like Next.js and other JS frameworks (I take "never trust the client" very, very seriously). [1] htt

This is exactly why I'm building Joystick [1]. I got tired of the constant indecision and churn in JS frameworks, so I've built (and am actively building) a full-stack solution that features a simple component API that doesn't change, backed up by a batteries-included Node.js backend. All wired together so it's easy to use and fast to build your idea (for real, not just marketing fluff). Purposefully designed for people who are trying to build real businesses, not tinkering around to pad their resume. The best part? I'm a tyrant about backwards compatibility, stability, and longevity (meaning, even if nobody else uses it, I'll be maintaining this for the long-haul). For the cynics: for the love of all that's holy, do not send me the XKCD cartoon about standards. I deeply care about solving this problem and this isn't "just another JS fram

It's either VDOM or having to depend on a compiler to do everything (how Svelte works). The advantage to the former is it's relatively easy to debug, whereas with a compiler, I'm at the mercy of its developer and their whims. VDOM may be "antiquated" (I mean it's a nested object or linked list which are standard paradigms) but slow depends on what you're doing. I did a linked list for my own full-stack framework's [1] component library and it's quite snappy. [1] https://github.com/cheatcode/joystick

I wrote something much longer and more detailed, but I haven’t the heart to post it in the end. This is a phenomenally bad idea. By escaping things willy-nilly you’re making life much harder, and vastly more error-prone. You can only even vaguely sanely do such things with the support of a better type system than you have available to you. You’re encouraging storing escaped HTML in the database; exposing an API that HTML-encodes all strings; you’re misusing the term “sanitise” (sanitising is fairly consistently used to mean stripping control sequences, not escaping). This is a disaster. Given that you’re working in JavaScript, you need to use something like JSX or equivalent functions or tagged template strings, so you can escape only as appropriate. As it stands, I would genuinely expect to be able to find trivial functionality and/or se

Yargh, there still be some sanity left on these seas [1]. [1] https://github.com/cheatcode/joystick

This is rad, Damien. Great work. Can you send an email to ryan.glover@cheatcode.co (didn't see anything listed on the site)? Want to discuss how I could make this work with Joystick [1]. [1] https://github.com/cheatcode/joystick

If you want a similar experience in JS check out Joystick [1]. It's being built to mimic the indefinitely stable design of stuff like Django and Rails. [1] https://github.com/cheatcode/joystick

> It's insane how much of the world's engineering effort and technology investment money has gone into putting lipstick on a pig. I'm a JavaScript developer and yes, this is deeply disturbing. Even more so after I built a framework [1] that just copycats what PHP/Rails does (treat the server like a server, and the client/browser like a client—no SPA spaghetti). It works, it's fast, and makes development 100x easier. I applied the same heuristic to deployments, eschewing all of the containers dogma and lo and behold, you can achieve great performance (and iterative speed) with old school, minimal tech (bare metal/VPS and just install deps and code directly on the machine). [1] https://github.com/cheatcode/joystick

There is. I was frustrated by all of the chaos and built a solution [1]. Not too far off from an RC1 and then a 1.0 (which is being done slowly so I can freeze APIs and avoid the typical JS rug pulls). [1] https://github.com/cheatcode/joystick

*Shameless self promotion warning*. If you're looking for a middle-ground between React and Web Components, check out Joystick [1]. I designed it to take a React v1 approach to ergonomics but you write your components with vanilla HTML, CSS, and JavaScript (no attribute hacks or new syntax to learn—if it's on MDN, it will work in Joystick). [1] https://github.com/cheatcode/joystick

I was excited for web components, but the API was lacking (the final tipping point that led me to build Joystick [1]). I just couldn't get on board with a web-standard that eschewed HTML in favor of stuff like this [2] where list items are attributes. The hyphenated namespace thing has always made my eye twitch, too (silly, I know). [1] https://github.com/cheatcode/joystick [2] https://github.com/mdn/web-components-examples/blob/main/edi...