I was kindof chief architect for a project where I worked. I decided on (and got my team on board with the idea of) making it an SPA. Open-in-new-tab worked perfectly.
(One really nice thing about it was that we just made the backend a RESTful API that would be usable by both the JS front-end and any automated processes that needed to communicate with it. We developed a two-pronged permissions system that supported human-using-browser-logs-in-on-login-page-and-gets-cookie-with-session-id authentication and shared-secret-hashing-strategy authentication. We had role-based permissions on all the endpoints. And most of the API endpoints were used by both the JS front-end and other clients. Pretty nice.)
I quit that job and went somewhere else. And then 5 years later I reapplied and came back to basically the exact same position in charge of the same application. And when I came back, open-in-new-tab was broken. A couple of years later, it’s not fixed yet, but Imma start pushing harder for getting it fixed.
motherfuckingwebsite is pretty old at this point. I remember seeing it on Reddit like 10 years ago. Parallax was all the rage back then, when we called “hero” images “jumbotrons” (because Bootstrap called it that, I think?)
Elder developer here too, correctly making my SPAs has made my work significantly more efficient and maintainable now that my back end is basically a rest api and my front end requires very little network interaction after the initial load, which has been made pretty minimal.
I’ve seen front ends that build queries that are blindly executed by the backend - I’ve seen GraphQL that allows the client to read arbitrary users’ passwords from the database - I’ve seen attack ships on fire off the shoulder of ori- whoops, wrong memory.
Anyways, you can create vulnerabilities anywhere using anything - imo more server side logic might mean more vulnerabilities on the server but it means less vulnerabilities overall.
Elder developer too, you can easily render react server side and statically. Once you remove state, react simply becomes pure functions that output jsx nodes, it’s also dead fucking simple, but gives the the possibility to add hydration and state later if you need it.
I prefer just writing my html, js, css, as is, and then transpiling to pack it down, treeshake, hash, cache bust, CSP, etc etc.
The amount if headache, overhead, inversion of control, mess, and bloat involved in frameworks tends to make me spend way too much time on writing boilerplate.
template and slot exist now, and modern js can do most of the shit fancy libs used to.
There’s very little need for frameworks unless you meed a SUPER dynamic website that has tonnes of mutability.
The amount if times i see people load in like 3 frameworks and 10mb of bullshit and ten js files to make a fucking static form that doesn’t even do anything fancy is insane.
Just fucking write the like… 8 lines of normal code to populate the form, wtf? Why are we using routers at all, HTTP already exists and does that, why did we re-invent http?
Front-end devs need to spend less time installing npm packages to try and magically solve their issues and just learn how to actually write code, SMH.
Anyone that builds a SPA and breaks opening in new tab or history caching and back/forward nav isn’t a good frontend developer (or lacks experience, which is something that’s fixable!). These have been solved problems for a long time.
Neither does vue. You need vue-router, which is required anyway to make an spa with multiple pages.
The only thing that breaks is any component state isn’t saved. But this can be fixed by rendering <RouterView> with <KeepAlive>. How to do this is mentioned in the documentation.
I assume it’s similar with react and react-router-dom.
I mean, for sure, and this meme isn’t trying to say that all SPAs are bad. But defaults matter, even for experts.
This meme was inspired after I had to use an SPA, which among those points in the meme, also broke using Alt+Left to navigate back. The normal back-button worked (even if it then had to load for ten seconds to re-display static content).
Which is just a typical example to me. You don’t even need much expertise to figure out why Alt+Left is broken. But you have to think of testing Alt+Left, because it’s broken by default.
I have never heard of alt+left, and I’ve been using the Internet since Mosaic was all the rage. Shame on me, it seems to be implemented in all browsers. How could I have missed it?
It’s even implemented in many file managers and text editors and such. Pretty much the standard shortcut for navigating history. But yeah, hilariously it’s somehow also a rather well-kept secret.
Yeah, I have no trouble believing that. It took quite a while before I learned of this shortcut and when I did, I was wondering why I would ever want to use it.
But I generally work from my laptop these days, without an external mouse connected, so reaching from my touchpad, the Left key is right there.
Your reason for using it was exactly my question. “I have a mouse with a built in back button, why would I want to remove my hand from my mouse and navigate with the arrow key?”
Yeah, that works on my personal laptop, but not yet on my work laptop, because they insist on preinstalling an old, buggy OS. If that did work everywhere, I would probably be using that, but not breaking Alt+Left for whoever needs/wants it, would still be nice. 🫠
Ok, that’s unfortunate. But I agree, the browsers default keybindings really shouldn’t be broken it’s really annoying. I hate it when middle click doesn’t work with some web pages. 😒
I could, good point. I do disable plugins for clients so they can’t beat up their own website too much.
Still, there are legitimate uses for opening a site in a new tab; e.g. when it’s an external website. I don’t think I should automate that, since there’s a granularity in there.
legitimate uses for opening a site in a new tab; e.g. when it’s an external website
This is not a legitimate use—this breaks the default user agent behavior & completely removes the autonomy of opening in the current window (there are tons of ways to open in a new tab/window). Consider rechecking the article linked higher up the thread tree.
There was an early news story where the subcontractor claimed that it wasn’t their responsibility to tighten the door plug bolts before delivering the entire fuselage subassembly to Boeing.
I haven’t been keeping up with this news in detail, so it certainly seems plausible to me that some planes were found to be missing bolts entirely.
I remember reading the same thing, and iirc they were right. The subcontractor builds the fuselage and delivers it to boeing.
Boeing then opens up whatever doors and plugs will make it easier to install the interior. Once the interior is installed, they’re supposed reinstall and secure all the doors and plugs. Because Boeing is going to be opening them all up, they don’t bother to fully secure them.
That said, it sounds like a process that’s just asking for miscommunication. If you expect the part to be removed, just deliver the part separately. If you put the part in it’s place, then fully install it and secure it.
It’s a pretty standard process to have some parts installed “loose” and tightened at a later time. It could be to ensure fitment, add rigidity or even just to protect the mating surfaces from the elements during transport.
Also it’s probably not just because Boeing is gonna open them up that they don’t fully secure them. I haven’t seen the specs but it’s quite common to have a reinspection requirements when disassembling something that was fully installed for stress and damage.
Pretty much nothing in aerospace is left to communications. The assembly manuals are not just complete, they are painfully exhaustive.
This one said the informal log showed they had to remove the door module ( thus bolts ) but no record of reinstalling them…and they run two logging systems so not all info is captured in the other.
If I remember right, these fuselage assemblies get transported on a giant beluga-looking airlift airplane. Where the whole nose is the plane opens up to swallow fuselage sections whole.
If you ship the door plugs uninstalled, you’re probably looking at a while separate shipment.
This one said the informal log showed they had to remove the door module ( thus bolts ) but no record of reinstalling them…and they run two logging systems so not all info is captured in the other.
The latest iteration of the data I’ve found is that Boeing and Spirit (the subcontractor) used different QC systems that weren’t fully compatible; one of the areas of incompatibility is around manufacturing and maintenance procedures of the plug door, and nobody put a process in place to account for that (if you’re in tech, you know that means it was considered “tech debt” that can be fixed “later”).
Building “applications” out of HTML documents – a single one or otherwise – is the sort of thing that belongs in one of those “stop doing X” memes, unironically.
No. Users should be forced to install hundreds of apps, with two thirds of apps running simultaneously. And if they don’t have memory left on the device for that, they should uninstall apps and reinstall them when necessary.
I’m mostly a MP gamer and the only reason why I game on Windows still is the fact some games (because of the AC) simply do not work on Linux. And even in instances where you can trick the AC it’s not running in a VM, but on bare metal - you risk getting banned.
Sad. I hope this changes.
lemmy.ml
Oldest