I feel so embarrassed right now. I used to live on W3Schools, and never knew they had the validator to check your code. Holy shit this is amazing. 😂😂🤦

w3schools references help a lot

@calmyourtities I love it. I have a folder with like 50 individual pages bookmarked for future reference. It's by far my favorite website for coding/web design. (Aside from SO, despite them being assholes. You can still find the answers needed.)

What? W3Schools? Code checker? So many questions...

Who the fuck checks html? Who the fuck even writes html?

ESLint motherfucker! Have you heard of it?

🤣

@Froot I write HTML when my class assignment is to make a single page HTML & CSS website 😂😂.

@Artemix Fuck you're right 😂😂 I'm tired as shit

@Artemix Probablly. Still, who writes html these days 😄
All you need is the basic structure with one div whose id is "app". The rest comes from react or Vue or something (Vue works like that right?)

@Artemix What problems do you speak of?

Of course, you can hardcore your blog in html. But then again, why would you even develop a blog? That wheel has been invented like 100 times.

@Artemix Backend a do exist but they lag. Also, you can't carry certain elements from one page to another. Like say a music player.

So SPAs can do everything imaginable, while good old way made pages can't. They also provide awesome project structuring opportunities so you can make sense of it all once it grows.

I'm not saying SPAs are the be-all-end-all but they sure are damn awesome. Oh and you can make a SPA perfectly responsive as well if you want.

Also, React.js is like 200kb in production. Not really a problem considering today's speeds. You'll have most images take more bandwidth.

Btw how is not having any JS on the site a good thing? Do you live in the 90s?

@Artemix
Lag: The overall loading time might be the same but it will look more responsive to the user. Also, you only get that blank loading time on first load. Every next navigation will be instant with the data perhaps arriving a bit later but once again, it will seem much more fluent to the user.
With the traditional setup you do a full load on every navigation.
Also, imagine all that back and forth on a 500ms latency connection.

Js: how is it more compatible? Do you mean the people with disabled js? Do you then also support IE6? That would let you cater to yet another fringe group and make it even more compatible.

Also, what problems are you talking about? I still don't get it

w HAT

@Artemix Could be.
Yea static pages still have their place.
For example instead that static hard coded pages are used on some news websites. They do that so that they can serve more requests with less servers, since the server just sends a static file and nothing else.
The files themselves are ofcourse not written by hand but generated with some editorial tools I'd imagine