Right, we are all working on the same domain and we are all exploring different trade-offs at the template level. Texas also tries a different approach, correct?
But I would say those trade-offs came from doing different choices at the high level, user facing API, rather than the opposite (i.e. the template is not dictating how the user API should work).
Yes, that’s true, but it’s also true that LiveView’s design is only made possible because you’re willing to use morphdom on the client. Fortunately for us, morphdom allows us to oretend that the DOM doesn’t exist on the server and simply send binary segments.
Which is a very powerful idea, of course, but one which costs you some performance on the client.
A big difference between LiveView and Drab on one side and Vampyre on the other the first two force the user to manually update the assigns one by one, while I’d like to alllow the user to pass a completely new group of assigns with little performance impact. So yeah, there is a difference in API here that’s impacting the design choices.
A little offtopic: I’ve had trouble falling asleep last night.
I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about keeping the HTML generation as semantically correct as possible.
That would allow me to send VDOM (again, “Vampyre DOM”, not “Virtual DOM”) fragments to the client (encoded as json, for example, which is even more compact than raw HTML for most use cases). That would allow me to build a Marko VDOM on the client very cheaply and diff that against the Real DOM using morphdom. This would bypass the slowest part of Morphdom, which is to build a DOM from parsing raw HTML strings.
The main problem with this is that I’d be moving more complexity towards the server in exchange for a more performant client. And I have no idea on how to run meaningful JS benchmarks lol. This wouldn’t kill performance on the server, because most of the complexity would happen at compile time. I hope.
LV allows assign(socket, a: 1, b: 2, c: 3) and it will will send the minimal dynamic segments as necessary in a single payload, so I think we are there?
Yes, you are there. Vampyre is not there by design. I’ve made the conscious choice of avoiding that optimization for the time being. Sorry if I wasn’t clear.
EDIT: this is a criticism of Vampyre, not a criticism of LiveView