React JS: backend web application framework - model-view-controller

React's website states:
Lots of people use React as the V in MVC.
From this, I am inferring that React does not play the "M" and the "C" roles in MVC.
If this is correct, it means one cannot build an entire web application solely with React JS.
Then, how?
Does React require a complete MVC framework for the backend, such as Rails or Laravel?
Can React simply pull data from a backend where a framework, such as Rails or Laravel, would be setup as a web API?
Does React not need any of this and works in a totally different way (in other words: am I completely missing the point)?

MVC is just a term for structuring data flow in an application.
You do not need MVC to build an application, even if it might help.
What React does is that it specializes in building isolated components - where the data flows in a single direction(the von neumann model of computing).
This is very nice because you can build an application with the premise that everything is always rerendered when data is changed, thus avoiding hard to read "two way bindings".
The thing is that it's very inefficient to rerender every view when some minor data is altered, but Reacts "Shadow DOM" optimizes this process, and makes efficient rerenders.
But React does not care where it gets data from. You could build a backend with nodejs/php/ruby or whatever you want. How you communicate and send data between the frontend and the backend is also left up to you. You could use jquery/socketio/superagent or whatever you want.
You can also combine React with any other framework, or just skip frameworks all together and fetch the data directly from a react component.
Facebook, the creators of React, have their way or organising projects called flux, which plays well with react(even if it is not needed).
https://github.com/facebook/flux

Related

Web Dev stacks - GONE WILD --- Best Practice Architecture & Deployment?

I've run into a problem that I'm sure many new/junior web developers are facing. Before I state the problem, it's best if I first list the events that drove me to the "issue".
Step 1 - The Front-End:
I followed tutorials which allowed me to create a Vue project using the vue-cli - I now have a nice front-end ready to go, albeit it is in a way "standalone". It sits in its own directory.
Step 2 - The Back-End:
I move on, I start to look at the back-end. Laravel plays well with Vue so I go with it. Once again I follow tutorials, I create a database and an API. Fantastic.
I now have the barebones core elements for a CRUD application. However, the way the back and front end are connected seems to be convoluted (although this may be due to my inexperience and improper understanding).
Solution 1:
Some tutorials insist that the Vue project is "re-created" within the Laravel directories so Laravel is in charge of rendering the views.
Solution 2:
Others, from what I can tell keep them physically separate and have the front-end interact with Laravels API only.
What are the best practices when it comes to stack architecture? Should we aim to bundle the stack together as proposed in solution 1? Is solution 2 even possible or is that due to my misunderstanding? If it is, how is deployment handled?
From my point of experience, both are correct and the answer depends on what you want to build 😀
First, if you have a simple website and you want to make the front-end of it in vue and it is only this one website, you can put it all together and make the frontend in Vue, which is handled by laravel in the backend and you are done.
Second, the step further, is for this case, that you can have several frontends for your project. Example: You have a website and several (native or universal) apps to display your data. In this case, you can build an API, that handles all the logic, all the business secrets, and this stuff, that no one should know in detail. After that, you are free to build any frontend (Vue, native, plain-HTML), whatever) you like, that's the only purpose is to display the data the API gives back (with some little logic in it, of the cause, but the secret business logic is hidden in the API). You can even outsource the generation of an app, so you build the website frontend in Vue and another one can build an ios-app with swift or an android app with kotlin.
Hope, you get the point, the answer is, as often: it depends 😉

Difference between react.js and Ajax

When I googled about React.js what I got is: React.js is a Framework that is used to create user interfaces. If a particular part of the website is frequently updated that means we can use react. But I am confused that Ajax has been used for this only. We can update a part of site using Ajax without page refresh. For templating we would be using handlebars and mustache. Could somebody explain me in what ways react is different from Ajax and why we should use it.
In short, React uses AJAX. They are not related in the way you're asking.
Keep reading for a crash course in what React is, what AJAX is, and how they are used to make modern web applications.
This is probably a more simple explanation than you're looking for, but for anyone else who may be confused...
AJAX and Airplanes
Think about an Airplane. The most important part of an airplane is that it flies. But an airplane also has wheels. And the wheels serve a very important purpose, because without them the airplane would never fly or land, and despite all the awesome stuff a plane could do in the air, it wouldn't matter without wheels.
This is the same relationship that React has with AJAX. React is the airplane, and AJAX are the wheels. But, ya know, other things have wheels too. Tractors, cars, even some boats have wheels, and they're all very important, and crippled without wheels. So too is AJAX to other web technologies, but when you're talking about airplanes, its wheels are usually the farthest thing from your mind.
So React is to AJAX, what an Airplane is to Wheels.
But let's talk about AJAX. What is it? Why is it so important? How it is used in websites today. Then I'll show how it's used by React. Then show you what React does that's so impressive, it makes you forget about AJAX - Like an Airplane to its wheels.
Remember Websites in the 90's?
When you clicked anything, a new page would have to load to show the effect of your click - even if it was nothing. Here's an awesome example. Go to that page and click around... See how clicks whisk you away to a completely different page? That is the Internet before AJAX.
Now, take a look at this very page: next to each answer is an Up Arrow... Go ahead and click one of them... Notice the page doesn't reload, but you are given feedback: the arrow turns Orange. This may seem insignificant, but it represents big advancements in web technology: AJAX, or more accurately: the AJAX approach to web development.
The AJAX approach allows that to happen! And this is no big deal now; it's so intrinsic to the web experience, it's difficult to imagine the Internet without it.
AJAX and a Clock Face
A good analogy of the AJAX methodology, and how it changed the web is a simple wrist watch, or a wall clock... Imagine the minute, hour and second hands moving around the clock's face to show time. Now, suppose every movement of the second hand caused the entire clock to be destroyed and rebuilt?
All that effort of destroying and rebuilding just to show a tiny change?! Well, that would be an outrageous waste of resources, and that was the Internet of the 90's. Thankfully, we have AJAX now. Just as a clock seamlessly displays the time, AJAX allows web pages to show changes in data immediately, without the page needing to be refreshed; you click an up arrow, and it turns orange. No page reload needed!
Originally, AJAX was just the name given to using existing technologies together to show simple updates to the user, but it has become so intrinsic to the web experience that unless you know what you're doing, you wouldn't even know you're using it. For instance, fetch is the preferred way to accomplish the AJAX approach since 2015. Before that it was XMLHttpRequest - even though JSON was used to transfer data more often because it's less verbose. JQuery is the only web technology that actually says AJAX ($.ajax()) to my knowledge, but you typically wouldn't (and shouldn't unless you really know what you're doing) use JQuery with a react application.
And AJAX works just like webpages:
The user performs an action (like pressing an up arrow)
A client (A Web Browser like Firefox) requests data from a server (like the Stack Overflow (SO) Server).
The server processes the request (updates the database to record the upvote).
The server sends a response back to the client that says if the action was successful or not.
Finally, some of the code already loaded into the web page, decides how to process this new information (in our example, javascript would add a class to the up-arrow and CSS rules would dictate that elements with that class are orange).
The user only sees that the arrow is orange. All the other steps are hidden so it seems like one seamless, responsive action.
Single-Page Applications
Since we're not rebuilding the entire page with every click, you can keep information about the site stored in the browser. This can be used throughout your entire visit and future visits.
The first time you visit Stack Overflow, all of the CSS, JS, and HTML is loaded. These three languages define the style (CSS), behavior (JS), and structure (HTML) of the data sent back and forth from the server. And guess how that data is sent! AJAX.
This is how most of the web works now. Google, Facebook, Amazon, Youtube, Reddit, every site built with WordPress and WIX, even Stack Overflow - they all use this basic paradigm for delivering their sites to users efficiently. The difference comes in how the Single-page application is built and managed...
React.js
React is a javascript library for building and maintaining Single-Page Applications.
But that's not even that big of a deal. The big deal about React is how it allows you to build applications...
Basically, you build things separately, then put them together: Components come together to form an Application. So take a look at this totally plausible but fake code for all the answers on this page:
answerArray.map(a => <Answer answerData={a}></Answer>)
This is one line that shows most of the information on this page. That is a big deal. The developers at Stack Overflow created their own component, called "Answer" and its only job is to show an Answer. You run that in a loop, and bam, all the intricacies of all the answers are abstracted, hidden in the Answer Component, which is completely separate from other components.
Now take a look at this:
<App>
<Header />
<LeftSidebar />
<Question>
{ answerArray.map(a => <Answer answerData={a} /> )}
</Question>
<RightSidebar />
<Footer/>
</App>
This is the whole Stack Overflow site.
Each tag (Header, Question, Answer, etc.) is a component. These components are completely separate and have self-contained code, but here they are used together to build the more complex application.
Composition
An important concept of React is composition, and we just defined it above. "Composition allows you to build more complex functionality by combining small and focused functions" (flaviocopes). Our Application is composed of smaller components.
It's also important to note that each component contains its own functionality. That means if the user clicks a button and a warning appears, the button and the code that makes the warning appear are in the same component.
Functional Programming
Surprise, we already defined this too. Functional programming, for our purposes, means 1. objects; and 2. how they behave; are in the same place. Like the button example above. Click a button, get a warning. And that's all in the same file.
This is different than pre-React development where all the buttons would be in one file, and all effects of the buttons would be in another. And this isn't necessarily a wrong way to do things, but for web development, it is easier to think in terms of self-contained building blocks, rather than widely dispersed tools that don't work by themselves.
Why you shouldn't care about Moustache and Handlebars
These two technologies have been cannibalized by React. Similar to how React uses AJAX but makes it easier, Moustache and Handlebars are already inside React, and you're using them all the time without even knowing it. And to me, that's ok. There are arguments to the contrary, and knowledge is never a bad thing, so investigate further if you want, but this is already long enough, so that's all I'll say about that.
Instead, I will tell you about 3 technologies you should care about.
What you should care about instead...
Node
The main point of Node.js is that it executes JavaScript outside a browser. Big whoop, right? Well, it turns out this is one of the most influential advancements for web developers ever. In fact, downloading Node is often done before downloading React.
Node is important for 2 huge reasons:
It lets you download other stuff
It lets you process JavaScript before sending it to a browser
I could write pages and pages about Node, but your takeaway from this should be "Node is important, I should be on the lookout for more knowledge about Node and how it relates to React and web development."
NPM
NPM does not stand for "Node Package Manager", but it should, because that's exactly what it does. React, SASS, Angular, Vue, pretty much everything mentioned here you will probably use npm to install and keep updated.
Webpack
Webpack is a "module bundler". It takes all your js and css files and writes them to one file so you only have to worry about writing one <script> tag.
Each React component will have at least one js file associated with it. Each component should have its own file too. Keeping track of all those files is very demanding. Webpack does it for you, it just makes life easier, so learn about it early and don't shy away from it.
This is something so inherent to React Apps that most of the time it will just be working and you won't even know it. For instance, create-react-app installs it automatically, and does not require you to do anything - same with Babel...
Babel
Translates all your code to ECMA5 so it can be read by most browsers and most versions of those browsers.
Again, this can be installed with npm, or if you just want to play around with React and not get too bogged down with the minutia like this, you can run create-react-app, and this will just work with automatic settings and will be out of your hair while you learn.
They make stuff easier
NPM, Webpack, Babel, and many other Node packages are only there to make your life easier. Building web apps require a lot of maintenance - or small, non-programming annoyances that typically you don't even need to think about.
Try not to be intimidated by new packages because wielding their power can mean countless hours devoted to more interesting things.
Conclusion
Hopefully, this post has helped you learn the difference between React, AJAX, and the ongoing nature of web application development. React and AJAX are not comparable, but React uses AJAX, or rather you - the developer - use AJAX in React to get data without the page needing to reload.
AJAX and other technologies were monumental to the advancement of web applications, but because of how absolutely essential they were to applications, they were assimilated into new technologies so much so that you don't even have to know about them to reap their benefits.
My goal was to correct some misconceptions on your path of learning; explain the "why" of the current state of web dev; and introduce technologies you didn't mention but should know about: Node, npm, Babel.
If you want to continue learning, I highly recommend doing a tutorial in React. I have done some at platform.ui.dev/, and enjoy their approach to learning and their payment structure (I haven't been paid to say this). Good luck out there, and I hope this was helpful.
Ajax is used to refresh a web page without having to reload it : it sends a request to the server, but typically the response is processed by the javascript that displays dynamically a new element on the browser without having to reload the entire page.
React is a javascript library that dynamically update the page with inferface components. The components are calculated either by javascript interactions or by an ajax request that go through the server. So ReactJS can also use Ajax requests to update the page.
Mustache and Handlebars are a bit different from ReactJS as the main goal is to transform a template in a component that will be displayed in a page. It can also use Ajax to get data (for getting templates or json datas).
Ajax
We are using Ajax to send http requests. And we can't re-render a particular area of the page(DOM) by using Ajax alone. We need jQuery to re-render the page after an ajax call came up with the response. Actually comparing jQuery + HTML and React.js is far better than comparing ajax and React.js.
React.js
The role of the react.js is dividing page(DOM) into small pieces (Components). ex:- Profile image area, Main Navigation, Sidebar, Textfield, Button. etc. from Big pieces to small pieces. Most importantly we can bind functionalities into these components. Example:- Let's assume users need a popup to upload a profile image by clicking on above "Profile image area". We can write a function to open a popup. And also we can write another function to upload profile image to the database. In this way we can use ajax inside the React.js
Please follow this tutorial.
To simply put, React is a JavaScript library built by Facebook. It is commonly looked as a framework because of its many extensions but the official docs label it as a library for building user interfaces. Ajax on the other hand is not a library or a framework or a language at all. Ajax is a technique used by programmers to call web APIs without having the flow of your code be interrupted at all. At the end of that day, your JavaScript code is run synchronously line by line and Ajax is run asynchronously within your synchronous code but in a way in which it will never pause your code from and have it wait for the API call to be sent and received. With Ajax, sending and receiving data is all done in the background so you won't have to worry about the delay that it takes to get that data. You can actually use Ajax in your React code. Ajax uses something called Fetch to actually call an API and you can use a variety of methods to handle the data that you receive from the API such as .then and .catch or Async/Await. You also aren't required to use Fetch at all, there are other third party ways of calling an API with Ajax such as by using Axios. I'd advise you to watch a video on how to use these different tools because when you figure out how they all work, you'll find that React and Ajax can be used together to build a great application. Hope this helped, please vote however way you felt about this answer. I'm pretty new to this website.
If you've scrolled down to this point you probably have this feeling of missing something in these answers which are great though. For me, it was hard to grasp what AJAX is. I had to look it up on Wikipedia. You can find a very good explanation there. I also read Jesse James Garrett archived article from 2005 where he coined this term (AJAX) and described it as a new approach to web applications. To dig deeper you can visit MDN.
Asynchronous requests are so obvious today in web development that it's hard to imagine there were websites without them. That's the key to understanding AJAX. At that time XMLHttpRequest API was something new. Now we have Fetch API in JavaScript or we could use Axios.
Google Maps approach was revolutionary in 2005. You could zoom in, grab a map, and scroll around. This instant response you had without page reloading was a result of the approach called AJAX. It consisted of a set of technologies like XMLHttpRequest, DOM, html & css, javascript.
As you can see AJAX is an old term to describe an approach in web development that makes applications more responsive (more than 20 years ago). Thus no matter what framework you use (Vue, Angular) or a library like React you use AJAX approach whenever your calls to API are asynchronous and they don't stop the user from interacting with your app which is a standard approach today.
BTW React is a library because it doesn't have a built-in state management tool, or routing tool in contrast to Ember.js, Angular, or Vue. We often talk about React stack, a set of separate tools for building react apps (Redux, Zustand, context api, react-router).

SPA using DurandalJS and laravel

im trying to create a Single Page Website with DurandalJS in the frontend and Laravel as the Backend. Do you think this is a good Idea?
If yes how would I do the following:
What would your recommendation for the basic interaction between both frameworks be?
Would you rather have all the computation done in JS instead of Laravel sending calculated and styled returns?
How Do I setup Laravels controller in order to only get dynamic Data for, say a Div, instead of a whole page?
How can I adjust the browser URLs?
I hope I was specific enough, thank You in advance.
Laravel does not actually care about what framework you use to build the Frontend. Laravel is just a framework that helps you build your application with. It gives you great advantage with respect to the time spent and effort.
You can use any frontend framework that you want to build your app with. I have actually not used Durandal, but from the first look of it here is my opinion.
Durandal is built on top of jQuery, knockoutJS and requireJS. It also has a MV* architecture in place with support for eventing as well. So you could basically define routes on Laravel and initiate the communication between both the frameworks through events and ajax. Again this completely depends on the functionality that you are building.
In the overall flow of your app, consider Laravel as a Model that just gives data from a source to your app and Durandal as your views and controllers. This way, it will keep your data flow cleaner and easier to build. Computation of your functionality depends on how important and secretive the app is. If there are functionalities/implementations that you need to be secretive about, you can keep it on Laravel and just send computed data to Durandal. If its a web app that you are building, then keeping all implementation on the JS is just a right click away from knowing what and how you have built it. One can just see how the implementation is done just looking at the Javascript source of the web app. If you are building Mobile Device App, then the case is different.
Take a look at Restful Controllers. Will give you an idea on how to setup controllers to return only data. But if you need to return the div itself, then you can make use of the Basic Controllers of Laravel to perform them.
You can setup cleaner routes for the browser URL's. Take a look at Laravel Routing

pjax or client side MVC?

i have to start a new project, a webapp with lots of forms and screens and i really don't know which technology fit best. The application is an ERP like app, with very few animations and lot of forms. The goal is to reduce at minimum reloads and waiting time, it has to be as close as possible to a normal desktop app (a lot of work to look like a marvelous VB6 app :-)
On the one hand we have client side MVC (backbone). It's cool to have all the code running on client but in my mind this implies repetition of lot of code (for example all models definitions) from server (PHP + Fuel). Sure once loaded all the informations task like paginations or grid work without any delay but it also present some problems of synchronization (other users can change data and i have to manually invalidate data on client).
On the other hand we have pjax. The idea is to make all the templating and so on on server, just implement a logic to return the page without the frame for pjax request or full page on new requests. No code duplication, very simple client side.
I've read the the story from basecamp and from twitter and both the point make sense to me. You can't relay on visitor computer (features, performance ...)
The more i think about it the mode i like pjax over MVC, but maybe i'm missing something. Which are the MVC advantages over pjax or pjax disadvantages over Client side MVC ?
Thanks a lot
Backbone.js is good for heavy, single page web apps that never truly post back, but have lots of ajaxian things going on, interdependent cascading dropdowns, etc. It has a very good API for events and collections. If you have plentiful client side javascript, it can be a helpful way to organize it. It is opinionated in the sense that it expects your server-side architecture to be RESTful by default, and you have to make some effort to use it for non RESTful APIs.
The project I'm working on is an ERP web app as well, with asp.net MVC on the server-side. I've learned that Backbone (with handlebars as the templating system), and .net mvc really don't play together that well. If you go Backbone, you really have to go full-hog (controller methods serve up json, that's it). On pages in this app that are more or less 'normal' web pages with some forms, Backbone is the wrong choice.
I just googled pjax for the first time, so I've basically just read the short description at the top of the page, but I suspect that might be the way to go for your scenario, in keeping with Keep It Simple Silly principles.

Razor-based MVC vs. Single Page Application in MVC 4

I used to utilize MVC 3 Razor engine to render pages. Sometimes I had to use AJAX calls to transfer Razor-rendered HTML and inserting it into the page using JQuery. As new project is starting, we do consider to utilize MVC 4 Single Page Application framework which is new to us. I took the first glance at it which left me with mixed feelings:
On the one hand it implies all your data are transferred by JSON and client does all the job to render them and encode some UI-related logic which is great for server and network performance. On the other hand the client (HTML+JavaScript) becomes much more heavy with a bunch of magic strings and hidden relations inside it which seems to be hard to maintain. We got used to VS intellisense, type-safed .NET server code to render pages which we have to exchange for client scripts and Knockout binding statements in case of SPA.
I wonder are any prons and cons of using SPA comparing to Razor, other that this obvious one I've mentioned here? Thanks
Razor is a server based technology where SPA (Single Page Application) is an architecture approach used on the client (web browser). Both can be used together.
From a high level, SPA moves the rendering and data retrieval to the client. The web server becomes a services tier sitting in front of the database. An MVC pattern works best when using SPA. Frameworks like Knockout.js and Backbone.js can be used for this. The net results is a rich responsive desktop like experience.
To achieve this you'll need to be a descent javascript programmer or be willing to learn javascript.
Yes it's moving business requirements from C# into javascript. In Visual Studio there is limited intelli-sense for javascript. To have confidence in your javascript you'll need to lean on unit testing. The up side is the rich user experience (think gmail or google maps).
I think it sounds like you are already fairly well apprised of most of the trade-offs here; you'll have reduced network load with SPA, and will shift a measure of the processing to the client. You will, however, increase the complexity of your code, and make it slightly harder to easily maintain the system (simply because of the increased complexity - not due to any architectural problems inherent in SPA).
Another thing to keep in mind is compatibility. The reason I mentioned a "false choice" in my comment to your question is that to keep the site usable for folks with Javascript disabled, you will still need to provide regular, whole-page views. This is also a good idea to do for the sake of SEO; a crawler will browse your site as a user with JS disabled, and can then index your site. The site should then handle such incoming URLs properly so that those with JS enabled will find themselves in your SPA looking at the same content (as opposed to being dumped in the "no JS" view unnecessarily).
There's something else I'll mention as a possibility that might help with the above, but it breaks the ideals of an SPA; that is, using Ajax-loaded partials in some places, rather than JSON data. For example, say you have a typical "Contact EMail" form on the site; you want that to load within the context of the SPA, but it's probably easier to do so by loading the partial via AJAX. (Though certainly, yes; you could do it with a JSON object describing the fields to display in the e-mail form).
There will also likely be content that is more "content" than "data", which you may still wish to load via partials and Ajax.
An SPA is definitely an interesting project, and I'm about to deploy one myself. I've used a mix of JSON and partials in it, but that may not be your own choice.

Resources