Arc Forumnew | comments | leaders | submitlogin
3 points by hjek 10 days ago | link | parent

> Well progressive enhancement is not, not using JS. Progressive Enhancement is pretty much the opposite of Graceful Degradation.

Yea, exactly. I'm OK with JavaScript being used for better UX as long as core functionality works w/o JS. From W3C:

> So, graceful degradation is the practice of building your web functionality so that it provides a certain level of user experience in more modern browsers, but it will also degrade gracefully to a lower level of user in experience in older browsers. This lower level is not as nice to use for your site visitors, but it does still provide them with the basic functionality that they came to your site to use; things do not break for them.[0]

If it is assumed that voting is part of the basic functionality of HN, then HN does PE wrong by breaking it when there's no JS. It's a relatively recent change to HN and Anarki doesn't suffer from that issue.

Yet it's neat that HN uses JS to prevent page reloading on voting. I'm just doing no JS at all on my own project here to make sure I don't accidentally rely on it, because I don't really trust myself to use it in moderation.

> Frameworks can help with all this, but it's at a cost. The file size is bigger,

Yea, they're beneficial, but heavy. HN front page: 62K. HN search: 1.19M. Did they really need Angular for that search input form? That's where ClojureScript looks promising though: Their `helloworld` example is just 20K.[1]

[0]: https://www.w3.org/wiki/Graceful_degradation_versus_progress...

[1]: https://clojurescript.org/guides/quick-start





3 points by i4cu 9 days ago | link

Obviously you're more into graceful degradation than progressive enhancement.

My idea of graceful degradation is falling back to a message that says "sorry, not going to happen!" :)

So, obviously, I'm more into progressive enhancement than graceful degradation.

> ClojureScript looks promising though...

Well to be fair, ClojureScript is not a full fledged framework; It is a framework, but really it's more of a compiler with some library functions. Reagent [1], for example, is a library that bridges the gap between ClojureScript and React. So I'm not sure it's fair to compare ClojureScript to these full fledged frameworks... you're still correct though, in that ClojureScript alone can produce apps with a smaller footprint.

That said & just to compare, last time I checked, React and Elm are appx. 42-45kb, Angular is 90kb. So HN search, obviously need to add their own code to bring it in at 1.19M.

My app, written in pure Clojurescript, is currently at 90kb minified. I hope to bring that down, but chances are the first release will actually be a little larger.

1. https://reagent-project.github.io/

reply

2 points by hjek 9 days ago | link

> My idea of graceful degradation is falling back to a message that says "sorry, not going to happen!" :)

Hilarious! A degradation for sure but the graceful part of is questionable.

reply