Help me choose a tech stack for our web app, Zig Forums.
We are working on a mobile-first responsive web app and hope to reach an MVP as soon as possible. We already have designs in hand and a defined minimum feature set ready to go. I will be developing the backend and have experience in Javascript, PHP, and Python (love python) but have not ever used a framework like Node, Laravel, or Django. Lots of experience configuring LAMP stacks but not sure if that is still a thing in 2018.
For Front-end we are looking at React but Vue also looks tempting. Angular looks fairly obtuse and slow to develop.
The app will be HEAVILY database-driven and we ultimately will need to scale up DB accessibility via read replicas and other types of tricks. (NoSQL is not an option; we need a RDBMS).
I am very interested to see recommendations from Zig Forums help us reach the fastest and least painful tech stack for our project.
What do expect from Zig Forums? Backend should be written in c. Frontend should be written in plain html. This will have the fastest development time possible. Why? Because you won't be trying to implement idiotic features no one needs. It will also be fast, responsive, and work as well on mobile as desktop.
Christian Lewis
ASP on the backend with MS SQL Server, Flash on the frontend.
Charles Perez
Lighttpd is pretty great. It's a shame about the cuck license, though.
The thing with most JS frameworks is that unless you feel like playing dependency checker, you kinda have to go all in with Node. Thankfully, you can use an SQL database (at least MySQL and Postgres) so that's always a nice thing.
I actually like Django a lot, but responsive applications are kinda wonky unless you do everything through REST. It's meant for static sites. It's good at that. It shouldn't be forced to do something it wasn't meant to.
Also, if your mostly familiar with front-end JS development not tied to something like React, anything Node related is going to make you want to shoot yourself for a good few weeks. It really feels like some sort of abomination of a hackjob all around. It's still where the majority of the support is right now.
It's not the cool hip thing, but given the despite being a fractal of bad design, PHP by itself does lend toward an okay-ish responsive experience.
Michael Mitchell
I hate the license, but with Linux getting coc'd, I'll probably be forced to migrate to OpenBSD or some other shittily licensed OS sooner or later.
Ian Martin
Elixir/Phoenix, PostgreSQL, and Mithrill
Jayden Gray
What's wrong with that?
Jayden Reyes
It's retarded because HTML is and was always "responsive" up until the point you start using shitty CSS and JS libraries.
Josiah Foster
use literally anything kill self after burning down your place of employment
Juan Thompson
Wrapping text to fit the window is not the same as "responsive." You may use a computer like pic related, but the average user is on an iPhone.
>>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsive_web_design If you do plain html, you get responsive for free. It only becomes a problem when you start throwing in css layout shit. The solution is simple: don't do css layout shit.
Most people don't do their own web design. When you use blog software like wordpress it comes with complicated themes. Big corps have millions of dollars to waste building websites, and design is driven by management, who don't give a fuck about page weight or any of that crap. If you are writing a website from scratch, it pays to keep it simple.
Use css tastefully. Specifically avoid layout css. Table layouts are better, when necessary, but try to keep the footprint small.
Fucking nice to hear someone say you should use tables. I hate when people discourage it. It's so much fucking simpler and I don't have to use a shitload of CSS.
