starbuzz

I want to point out that while these benchmarks are very useful to detect underlying, potentially serious runtime and memory performance issues in your algorithm/framework, the implicit idea that even the slowest framework according to this list (e.g. choo) is a poor choice or inadequate for frontend development is ridiculous (the js-framework-bench creates > 80,000 nodes).

Please don't do that to your users, regardless of the framework you are using. Even the most complex user interface will have < 10,000 nodes. Tables/grids may get you there faster, however.

Still, in the case of Hyperapp we're talking about 100 to 200 milliseconds slower in the worst test (i.e., partial update) for a worst-case scenario.

Comment · 8 years ago

I meant the benchmark is using an older version of Hyperapp.

https://github.com/krausest/js-framework-benchmark/tree/mast...

The js-framework-benchmarks is very much maintained and actively developed. It's our go-to benchmark when fine-tuning for a new release.

In addition to that, the latest code on master (still unpublished) includes some notable improvements:

https://github.com/hyperapp/hyperapp/pull/663

Comment · 8 years ago

If all goes according to plan, it will look even more like Elm in the next major release (2.0).

Comment · 8 years ago

Elm is for anyone. I love Elm.

"for the rest of us" is a common English language idiom/phrase.

https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/41687/meaning-of...

I know the idiom mostly from For Dummies' books. I'm implying that Elm, while great, is not as user-friendly, intuitive or easy to use as Hyperapp.

I'm saying that Hyperapp is deeply inspired by Elm, but also designed with extreme devotion to details, minimalism, and simplicity.

Comment · 8 years ago

Hyperapp and Web Components is a great combo, especially because they can help with the problem of maintaining local component state, not a feature of Hyperapp.