Comments by "xybersurfer" (@xybersurfer) on "Theo - t3․gg" channel.

  1. being able to call the DOM directly from WASM certainly seems necessary, but i don't think that will magically solve the problem of having to first download huge runtimes. it seems unrelated
    3
  2. from a software engineering perspective i get why you justifiably throw overboard a whole technology and have keep changing technologies, because of these problems. but from a language or technology design perspective i think it's really dissatisfying, because there are some deeper issues here that cut across the tech being used, whether it's tRPC, GraphQL, REST. especially caching issues and the N+1 problem
    2
  3. 0:34 "giving customers access to their own databases" do you know how stupid that sounds. you need to stop with the cloud obsession
    2
  4. yep
    2
  5. i agree except for using it through a CLI. i've used both. Git through a GUI like in Visual Studio integrates better, which has advantages lots of advantages
    2
  6. agreed. also if the .NET team loaded some parts on the fly, then they probably wouldn't have to worry as much about tree shaking
    2
  7. that's pretty sad. i think this behavior is something ingrained in the Linux community
    2
  8. yeah the name totally sucks
    1
  9. exactly my thougts
    1
  10. getting tree shaking perfect seems like a waste of time because programs are inherently unpredictable. and to then turn say "WabAssembly Can't Win" because this on guy is making poor decisions, is silly. if tree shaking is so hard to get right statically, then it should be done more on the fly for things like reflection. people normally accept that there is a performance penalty for using reflection anyway. more statically typed languages like C# probably have an advantage here. i don't see the reason everything has to be put into 1 huge module that has to be downloaded. people need to take some lessons from how things are already work for JavaScript on the web (not just this guy). in JavaScript there are typically no modules, or you could say that the classes in the "modules" can be downloaded as separate files. it's similar for whole websites that are also not downloaded in full. from the outside, it looks like these people are trying to solve the wrong problems
    1
  11. 14:35 quiet quitting is not doing nothing. don't repeat lies
    1
  12. yeah. it sounded like company politics was the main issue there
    1
  13.  @danhorus  it sounded like a technically fixable problem
    1
  14. despite this sarcastic video, i consider it bad that HTMX tightly couples the back-end and front-end
    1
  15. i could understand encrypting the database as a whole, but not so much all individual fields within it
    1
  16. that would be good, but it has nothing to do with the size of WASM modules that implementations force you to download
    1
  17. this sounds more like a refactoring issue, or a lack of indirection
    1
  18.  @PieJee1  who said anything about users? if the front and back-end are in the same code base, then i would imagine that renaming something in the back-end with the IDE, could automatically rename it in the front-end. with both in the same code base you can also have static type checking, which i imagine avoids these crashes. theoretically it all depends on the available tools, and this is not specific to GraphQL, but i admit that i haven't found good enough tools for this. actually the coupling is usually not tight enough
    1
  19.  @PieJee1  users not reloading the page, sounds like a solvable problem, which you also seem to be hinting at. yes browsers can be quirky, but i'm not convinced it's that bad, for this very specific feature, that you can't easily find something that works on all major browsers. there are so many possible ways to go about this. it only needs to be solved once
    1