> server-side rendering for each request in V8 might be more expensive to host than client side rendering in V8?
Considering mobile, embedded or even considering that my grandmother still owns a i3 4th gen, maybe would be better SSR, but for modern machines i'm not in for SSR, still feels a little bit clunky to me.
> for a properly-chunked app, hopefully most requests for the larger vendor bundles are cached/JITed, and each request doesnt actually download much extra JS.
Yes, cache here helps alot, but saving mobile data still be pretty good, considering some SPAs doesn't chunk it's script files very well.
Not here to defend Fresh, it has lot of flaws, but
> I think that having by default a pretty awesome templating system (which even allows for components), a webpack based build system for frontend assets
Fresh literally does that "by default" without having to include any library/dependency.
> easy way to serve, cache and bust assets, and a trivially easy way to submit forms and validate user input.
It's almost the same effort in Fresh.
> makes it pretty full stack
Define fullstack, but even defining it, Fresh totally covers what you said.
To be "fullstack" to me means to be filling in all stacks, being in web? Frontend and Backend.
To me, having a templating system and having things rendered in backend can be "frontend", but you saying "Laravels is pretty more close to a fullstack framework than Fresh" is not something very logic here.
Considering mobile, embedded or even considering that my grandmother still owns a i3 4th gen, maybe would be better SSR, but for modern machines i'm not in for SSR, still feels a little bit clunky to me.
> for a properly-chunked app, hopefully most requests for the larger vendor bundles are cached/JITed, and each request doesnt actually download much extra JS. Yes, cache here helps alot, but saving mobile data still be pretty good, considering some SPAs doesn't chunk it's script files very well.