SebastianVerified account

@dan_abramov I get that you can make things really nice with extra effort. But should this be the default recommendation for every app?

@dan_abramov Would you recommend that Wikipedia switch to React since you can do initial rendering in HTML and rehydrate it?

@feross No, until React is so good that it’s easier to do this than implement server rendering. My hope is that in 15 years we’ll get there.

@feross Cognitive cost, tooling overhead *today*. That is what we are working on :-). This is why I say improve rather than give up.

@dan_abramov pretty sure @feross is trying to say (or at least i would argue) that wikipedia has nothing to gain from switching to react

@sebmck @feross Got it now, yep. I thought this is “SPAs are bad tech direction” rather than “SPAs are not ready yet” kind of argument.

@dan_abramov @feross i don't see how wikipedia could ever benefit from a SPA though?

@sebmck @dan_abramov @feross In it’s current state of UI / UX I see no benefit, but doing a SPA could open doors for visual persistence.