Comments by "" (@diadetediotedio6918) on "These benchmarks look terrible for React..." video.

Why he did not used the Solid without hydration thing, was not it like 2x the speed and had the same equivalence with his templating thing?
6
@jatinkumar7287 I read it, I just don't find this convincing enough. Feature parity makes more sense than testing the "normal operation of the framework" because the framework can do something that is very convenient but at the same time very expensive in the baseline. But if you wanted the same speed than fastify without that feature, removing it opt-in would be a thing you would already have in mind when chosing the technollogy. You can clearly see it by thinking about it this way: If you remove something that do matter and will make the features of solidjs less than the features of fastify, it would be very easy to just use it as an argument and say that "solid is only as fast or faster if we remove something that makes it good", but in the case of removing hydration it appears to not put it below fastify in any way, so the only perspective that benefits itself on not using that benchmark is fastify. Of course, you can also argue that we should prioritize the "out of the box experience" in that benchmark, which would be fair, but from the article this did not appear to be their intent.
1