I made some SPA using vuejs-templates/webpack and that's ok. But now I am developing a website, almost everything is static, so there's no need to be a SPA. I already made the pure html/css layout.
Now I will make some pages with forms and dynamic content, I would like to use vue components inside these pages.
Tell me which of this ideas is the best or give me a better option:
Multiple entries in webpack: I don't know very well how to do it, but I guess I can create a webpack project by scratch and render multiple entries that I include in the pages I want.
Use browserify: I didn't want to do this, but sounds like a good option... I could use vueify to render *.vue components
Use Nuxt: I never tried, but seems a good option too, I could make a "SPA" with SSR.
Tell me if you have another idea.
Thank you
Don't rule out just referencing Vue as a script file. No bundle, no compilation step. You lose single file components, but you can get something very like them by using js template literals. If your needs are simple and you don't want to impact on the rest of the site, this could be a fine solution.
Related
I want to prototype a quick app but don't want to go down the road of using a framework like React or Vue. I'd also prefer not just creating an html file and a js file that is imported within the html.
Is there a way I can make use of npm packages, SCSS and still write vanilla Javascript without the usage of a framework?
Without using a framework, the most straightforward way to using NPM packages in the browser would be using Browserify. Check out https://medium.com/jeremy-keeshin/hello-world-for-javascript-with-npm-modules-in-the-browser-6020f82d1072 for instance.
Otherwise you can use Gulp,which helps running Browserify, SCSS etc, and use BrowserSync to refresh on changes. But I personally wouldn't go this way: while this is a great way to understand how stuff works, it takes a bit of time to setup properly, and isn't used that much anymore.
My advice is:
Go with Webpack or Rollup. Seems harder to grasp than Gulp but at the end of the day, learning Webpack is very useful (much more than learning Gulp), for instance if you happen to work on a project that uses it (and there are so many).
Use a backend framework that bundles all this kind of stuff. Like Laravel which uses Mix - you can even use Mix without Laravel but there will be a point at which you'll probably need some static data, some routing, interactions... So if you need something more than just hardcoded JSON data, go with a framework. Laravel is great for prototyping but it's not the only one.
I am a starting web developer. The company I work for makes relatively simple websites, some with blogs and/or products. We use our own CMS and don’t use a framework.
I am trying to improve the architecture/structure we use for websites. Which is currently done with a single stylesheet and a single JS file. Which is awful to work with for me because I can never find anything in these files.
So I started to separate these files into smaller scss and JS files. I’ve done some research.
And i’d like to work with components Like this (preferably the first one):
I think this would work well for me because i am working in those 3 files at the same time, and then i don’t have to open them from different locations. Is this a good way to structure websites?
When i include the .php file for the component i would like to have it automatically call upon the right JS and scss files. This way i could move the component to a different website include it and it would work.
Is this possible? Is this even the right way to think about it?
And if not how do i go about importing or compiling JS and scss/css?
I am currently migrating a Play Framework application with a view composed entirely of Twirl templates into one with a view composed of a mix of Twirl and React. I have written a PlayRunHook to integrate Webpack with Play's build process, and the result is JavaScript bundles whose names match what I have hardcoded in the new barebones Twirl templates.
So things look like this:
#(title: String)(implicit session: Session, staticAssetResolver: StaticAssetResolver)
#main(title) {
<input type="hidden" name="pageTitle" id="pageTitle" value="#title">
<div id="content">
</div>
<script language="JavaScript" src="#staticAssetResolver.asset("dist/profile.bundle.js")"></script>
}
The React code in the bundle knows to mount at the "content" div and receives props provided in the template.
This all works well, but I would like to avoid hardcoding the bundle name so that I can benefit from asset fingerprinting. This means figuring out a way to more tightly couple Webpack with Play's build process so that Webpack's output can be incorporated into the Twirl templates.
I have researched plugins, but what would you suggest for integrating Webpack and Twirl in this way?
This is probably not what you want to hear - I too messed around with trying to figure out how to embed interactivity in Twirl... but in the ended I concluded it was a back idea to mix javascript and twirl, ended up doing this;
https://blog.usejournal.com/react-with-play-framework-2-6-x-a6e15c0b7bd
It could be that I'm simply not familiar enough with Twirl, but after wrestling for quite a while, I found that simply "changing worlds" into react, and having it talk to the backend via
fetch(/api/myRoute)
was quite productive. In conjunction with React Router I found myself very happy with the productivity, performance and outcome. I spent little time on "custom" build work, outside of copy and paste from that blog, so was able to concentrate on what I wanted.
I would also say that I am not skilful enough, and did not have time to start writing custom "RunHooks"... so that may also be the problem!
The above link worked well for me... with the only downside being that when changing routes one gets no tool support... so it is manual and risky to change a backend route or method signature. Probably not great for a big app... but for my small set of requirements was an effective strategy.
I have been looking for a few hours for something that could help my problem, but as of now, I havent found it.
The problem is:
I am working on an PHP/Latte server-side rendered website, where I have decided to implement Vue. However, since there is no possibility for me to change this website into an SPA, I need to just create micro components with Vue and use them inside the BE templates.
By that I mean that there is a .latte template, where I insert a <My_component /> element, which gets rendered client side.
Which is fine for some components, but others, like the main menu, product or something else important for SEO purposes, needs to be somehow pre-rendered for crawlers.
By now I have read 10+ articles and watched 4 videos on prerender-spa-plugin, which I am sure is a great solution for SPAs, but I dont think it would work for my case. Especially since I am not using Vue router.
Nuxt.js also seems like not what I want and would be a bit of an overkill in my case.
Basically I just need a webpack or Node based plugin, that would take .vue files, that I would need to be pre-rendered, and create (build) the static HTML for them. Which would be either automatically or by hand inserted into the .latte template.
Has anyone had any experience with this?
I am using Yeoman to auto-generate a project using Bootstrap & Sass. The one thing I am having trouble with is changing the default structure of the project to be more modularized. The generator is here on GitHub.com
Currently the application is structured like so:
/app
/images/
/scripts/
/controllers/
main.js
app.js
/styles/
main.css
/views/
main.html
index.html
I'd rather have it separated into individual directives with a core(shared) folder, so that it would be like so:
/app/
/directives/
/home/
home.html
homeCtrl.js
home.sass
index.html
app.module.js
app.route.js
But I am having difficulty figuring out the best method of modularizing the project. Am I supposed to be creating the file structure that I want with the pre-generated application, and then edit it within the Gruntfile.js? Is there a more streamlined way of doing this, or am I SOL doing it manually?
The best and elegant way is to follow their guideline around creating a customised template which you can use to generate apps based on it.
However, if this is a one off thing you probably won't need to bother unless you want to create something decent and share it with community, so other people can use your template and create their app with modularised structure.
Even if you don't try to write your own template you can still read the guide and modify the initial template generator to change the file structure before creating the app for you.
Here is another good article around template customisation:
https://scotch.io/tutorials/create-a-custom-yeoman-generator-in-4-easy-steps
This project appears to be abandoned. The most recent change is a year ago, there are 67 issues and 18 pull requests. It's probably only generating Angular 1.x code as well, and that may not be "up to date" with current Angular 1 best practices.
You can, of course, fork the project and make changes yourself, and even take over maintenance of it, but you might be better to look at something like Angular-cli, which generates Angular2 code, and is being actively developed.