I know. This thread was specifically about the web though. Web components?
If you put React on the web, it is only fair to consider it together with react-dom in all the comparisons. Without a rendering library, React by itself, however small or generic, is not of much use. So what the absolute majority of people mean when they say "react" in the context of building things for the web, is the react/react-dom combination.
> I know. This thread was specifically about the web though. Web components?
That is exactly the point. This author compares Web Components to React and Astro. Web Components is a spec. React is a general-purpose XML-based reactive GUI rendering library. Astro and Next are frameworks. Next uses React, and Astro can use React. I think you can use React and ReactDOM to render custom elements on the Web already (or will be able to soon), nothing fundamental prevents it. Either the author is not experienced enough to understand what is what, or he tries to gather engagement by inciting a holy war using false dichotomies.
> If you put React on the web, it is only fair to consider it together with react-dom in all the comparisons.
React-the-library doesn’t cease to exist if you happen to use it with ReactDOM. It also doesn’t automatically become a framework. In addition, the Web exists within the rest of reality. Even if all of the above contenders were also libraries, if one library works independently of particular medium (e.g., can be used in native applications, etc.) then it exists on another level than any Web-centric library.
I know. This thread was specifically about the web though. Web components?
If you put React on the web, it is only fair to consider it together with react-dom in all the comparisons. Without a rendering library, React by itself, however small or generic, is not of much use. So what the absolute majority of people mean when they say "react" in the context of building things for the web, is the react/react-dom combination.