The difference is, in SwiftUI you fire up Xcode and you are up and ready to build the thing you intend to. No tooling setup, no intermediate steps to transpile the code into something you can’t recognize and the “backend” that deals with the logic is the same language with the same paradigms. Mind you, SwiftUI is considered a downgrade when it comes to tooling. Yet everything fits and you didn’t spend mental energy to try to make the tools work as intended.
My mantra now is to use the tool that is built to do the things I want to do and stop trying to make make it work in ways it’s not intended to. That’s why when I want to have a web interface I simply work with DOM directly. That’s how the creators of the web browser intended:) No virtual DOM, no libraries doing magic and managing the DOM for me. I'm sure there's place for ReactJS too, it's just that its not for most use cases.
All I want is tools that I can fully fit in my working memory and don’t spend time trying to make things work so I can do the work I care about. Simplicity and robustness is the paramount.
I think the big difference right now is React has been released for 10 years vs SwiftUI's 5, so people had had the time to shoot themselves in the foot much more with React. IMO it doesn't take away from it still being much better than what it replaced.
> no intermediate steps to transpile the code
Sorry, but how is Xcode not "tooling"? And how is there no compilation step?
It should be obvious to us all that the frontend world needs more stable and reliable tooling. But pretending that native or mobile apps somehow don't need tooling is not a serious position.
> I simply work with DOM directly
Do you care to show us any apps that you've built with this approach?
So much of this debate is people talking past each other about what they need. Some people are building a glorified blog CMS, and jQuery is fine. Some people are building Figma, and think the former camp are insane for suggesting jQuery is fine.
> That’s how the creators of the web browser intended:)
The web is the best application delivery platform we currently have, so people will ship apps on it whether or not that's what Tim Berners-Lee thought they should be doing.
The overhead is so low compared to the web tech, it’s no comparison.
If you want to do something weird you can complicate things if you like but the defaults are great so most of the time you don’t have to.
You know how on web tech there's many tools like packers, linters etc? Those are all tools you need only because you want to pretend that JS is not JS and you end up putting a distance between yourself and the actual thing that runs so you loose your ability to understand what's actually going on because it's actually not your code that's running in the browser and you had to do the chores to achieve it.
On native development these things also exists(the CPU doesn't understand human readable code, right? However the abstraction layers are straightforward), the packer equivalent would be linker I guess(not exactly but...) but you don't have to even know about that unless you are doing something that explicitly requires you to control how modules need to be connected. These tools are mature and simple, they daisy chain, you don't go through huge configuration files and its usually just a flag you add when you want to do something non-default(which you wouldn't if you are doing something like building UI). For huge projects things can get quite complex but the complexity isn't the default, unlike React & similar.
