Post

Any clue what is making this quicker than vanillajs-lite? Conceptually it doesn't make sense to me, but JS performance is quite surprising sometimes

Ooh I'll give it a shot and report back

I let my WCs extend a 'BaseWebComponent' class which takes the template string in the constructor. It puts it into the DOM. It also looks for any elements with 'data-name' and creates those as properties on the component. That avoids dom queries or id clashes. But then am I building a framework? 😭

CLARIFICATION: This implementation is not supposed to imply that Portable HWCs *cause* improved perf, but rather that they are a meaningful improvement on how one can architect WCs They're cracked cuz they let you package the power of Vanilla JS in an ergonomic way that other WC archs haven't

I was just going to ask for a resource like this. Thanks for pre-emptively sharing it!

Ah yes got it. In that case, I'm curious what you think of my response to Ryan? I'm not trying to willfully/maliciously misunderstand, but I do view things a bit differently

Also note I was precise in my wording: “It looks like they are faster than the fastest Vanilla JS _implementation_ …” Not that they are faster than vanilla JS as a general statement

Yeah, we need a better test that runs through all the standard things all frameworks can do besides reactive cars and templates. @ryansolid.bsky.social might have some thoughts on what tests to add.

Yeah, we can make a single CE wrapper, then everything inside can be vanilla JS basically, which is not really representative of a real world app (lots of nested components, child slotting, events, strung properties, etc, etc. It would be awesome to update the tests for more of these scenarios.