Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I agree with all of your points but number 1. I think a good SPA should be a network-reliant application whose complexity is demanded by the use case. And a good framework for one should have provide near instant load times: a small core library with additional resources and logic only loaded on demand.


I think of good applications as a collection of SPAs. There is no benefit to forcing every single feature of an app into only one page. Ajax means we can implement more functionality without a page reload, which is good to a degree, but at a cost of slower initial load, losing URL state, and difficulty tracing UI behavior to underlying code.

I am working on a legacy SPA now and it's horrible. (Our users have learned to refresh frequently due to uncertainty of state.) I am not sure how much to blame on poor implementation as opposed to inherent weaknesses of SPA architecture.


Almost all of the SPA frameworks out there right now are nightmarish. I think React is pretty good but limited. What you're describing is probably a much better way to handle the needs of most sites.


Furthermore, pushing most of the UI layer to the client reduces server load and results in a more horizontally scalable solution.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: