TE
테크에코
홈24시간 인기최신베스트질문쇼채용
GitHubTwitter
홈

테크에코

Next.js로 구축된 기술 뉴스 플랫폼으로 글로벌 기술 뉴스와 토론을 제공합니다.

GitHubTwitter

홈

홈최신베스트질문쇼채용

리소스

HackerNews API원본 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 테크에코. 모든 권리 보유.

Static as a Server

56 포인트작성자: danabramov약 4시간 전

8 comments

ricardobeat37분 전
Varnish and PHP say hello from the distant past of 2008.
raddan약 3시간 전
I understand that somebody might want to generate static pages from code that generates it dynamically, but I fail to appreciate _why_. Are people using this for a handful of pages they want to load quickly and whose contents rarely change, or are people building entire static sites using things like React? If it's the latter... uh... why? It's been awhile since I was a web developer, so maybe my pain threshold is inappropriately low. I think Jekyll is fine and use it pretty regularly.
评论 #43930442 未加载
评论 #43930675 未加载
评论 #43931550 未加载
评论 #43931507 未加载
评论 #43930488 未加载
评论 #43930518 未加载
评论 #43930497 未加载
评论 #43931586 未加载
评论 #43930362 未加载
switz약 3시간 전
It&#x27;s unfortunate that there is so much misinformation about what react server components really are, but it&#x27;s not necessarily the fault of either party. The name is confusing (names are hard), the architecture is new (people don&#x27;t want to learn it), and it lends itself to conspiracy theories (that aren&#x27;t true).<p>But it really is a magnificent piece of technology. Because they&#x27;re called &quot;Server Components&quot; people think that &quot;server&quot; means run-time, but as a friend pointed out, 15 years ago people were running wordpress servers and caching pages ahead-of-time. As Dan mentions here: &quot;server&quot; doesn&#x27;t imply it has to execute at run-time.<p>But there are also massive advantages to running a server at run-time that seem lost on people. I do think over time the concepts behind RSCs will filter out into most web frameworks because they are so powerful. It&#x27;s the best functionality of the old-world SSR languages (PHP, rails) combined with the best functionality of the new-world client frameworks (React). You get to pick and choose when to lean on either, and they work together through composition.<p>I wish people were a bit more patient and spent a bit more time trying to understand these concepts before bashing them. Part of that is the fault of names, communication, and lack of documentation. But the underlying technology is rigid and strong. It&#x27;s here to stay, even if it arrives in other forms.
评论 #43929949 未加载
评论 #43930445 未加载
评论 #43930423 未加载
评论 #43931610 未加载
atoko약 3시간 전
I wonder if the omission of React Context in this example is intentional. Do you think Context is compatible with suspense? In the sense that posts is being passed to components as props three times over.<p>Is it because each component is expected to abstract over async, relying on the promise state?
评论 #43930579 未加载
ktpsns약 3시간 전
This got popular in JS toolkits a few years ago, at least. For instance, Svelte(kit) also has a static output variant.
revskill약 3시간 전
If you put a cache around all GET API handler, you&#x27;re faster than static.
评论 #43930728 未加载
评论 #43930601 未加载
throwaway314155약 2시간 전
I am having trouble understanding this article&#x27;s premise:<p>```<p>RSC means React Server Components.<p>And yet, although this blog is built with RSC, it is statically served from a Cloudflare CDN using their free static hosting plan. It costs me exactly zero.<p>Zero.<p>How is this possible?<p>Aren’t these React Server Components?<p>```<p>Why is any of that confusing? The very first thing I think of when someone says &quot;React Server Components&quot; is, well, server side rendering of react components. What else could it possibly be? Is anyone who is an established React developer really confused by this?
评论 #43931115 未加载
评论 #43931003 未加载
snambi약 1시간 전
This is nothing but clickbait.
评论 #43931402 未加载