JQuery you deserve to have
https://animejs.com/ animation, it's good to use this library!
is too fucking appropriate. Does it matter how you write the animation effect or how you write it?
- Pure html + Javascript + css is a natural hot update.
- whether it is good or not depends on the way you use it, in fact, the two are not very different.
- it's a bit thankless to force engineering on the activity page. Unless you get all the wheels of code generation, the time it takes to build and compile the project is a little too much compared to the time you spend writing code.
it is the fastest to write HTML directly, and then extract the JavaScript needed by the activity to make a general library
it is better to do the activity page or jquery.
1. At present, our solution is to use vue in the web framework and SSR to facilitate development.
2, big turntable, scratch card, smashing golden eggs and other game forms are all made into SDK , which has nothing to do with the frame, and can be used freely in vue, react and other frames.
generally speaking, I will consider a few points before making such a technology selection:
- which framework is better for most of the development staff of the company, because there is no time cost for them to learn
- now that we have done so much with jquery, we should consider whether the development of these activity projects will last forever. I have done a lot of activities before, most of which are useless after a week. I don't know about your situation. If the former, you can change the new active project to react or vue.
- the foundation of the company, whether the company has related technology storage, such as packaged tools and libraries, can be quickly compatible with the new framework.
- synthesize some of the above considerations to estimate a time and labor cost, such as whether the results are equal or how much worse I use jquery to continue development for a month and I use react to redevelop for a month.
each company's technical background is different, and employees are good at it, so I suggest considering these aspects. In fact, the difficulty of development is about the same. If you ask someone who is good at react to answer, it must find react development easier and easier.
of course you give me a choice and I may like react, but most people may object to saying that vue is simpler, or that vue and jquery are used to temporarily solve some compatibility problems and do too much
.
according to the situation of your company, think that vue will be more appropriate, low learning cost and easy to use, proficiency can reduce development time A company has a framework series is better
in principle, which is easy to use. For example, if your React/Vue has ready-written components, then go to MVVM, or have ready-made sealed libraries, then there is no problem with using native js or Zepto. But it is not recommended to rigidly set up a certain technology stack, how to put it? Yes, but it's not necessary.
in fact, there are many ways to play. For example, you can use the Canvas game engine, and if you use Egret, you can also contact TypeScript or Pixi.js,Phaser. For example, in the multi-page PPT-style marketing H5, the previous team rolled up a set of PS scripts by themselves, and then agreed with the designer to divide each P into groups and cut it at the final output, then the scaffolding went straight out of the project template, opened the design draft and ran the PS script, and automatically cut the picture and output the element size to a json, and finally opened the running process. (however, the PS script is still suggested to the team to study). In fact, I think it may be more important for you to find a convenient animation library.
simple active pages are still attached to vue. How can the white screen time without pre-rendered pages be better than that of ordinary jq pages? I think it is enough to sort out the commonly used activity js and cooperate with gulp and other processing tools that are a little easier to configure.
simple active pages should not be added to vue. How can the white screen time without pre-rendered pages be better than that of ordinary jq pages? I think it is enough to sort out the commonly used activity js and cooperate with gulp and other processing tools that are a little easier to configure.
< hr >
agree
for the active page, using mvvm is a bit overdesigned. Take the minimum resources to get the maximum benefit as the standard, do the same activity page, and achieve the same effect to see whether it is fast to use mvvm or jquery, or jquery.
H5 activity page suggests going directly on jQuery
such a simple page should not need to use such a powerful frame
activity page, then the suggestion is still how to come comfortably, in fact, it mainly lies in rapid development, the general activity page directly on h5 + jquery
vue and react is just a page for you to become easier to maintain and expand, with high reusability. Just focus on logic and css animation implementation. How did you use animation before, and how do you still use it now? Just the way of operating dom needs to change into a data-driven and responsive
H5 marketing campaign. There is no need to use these frameworks for small projects like this. Just jq directly. Jq's api is easy to see, not much, and easy to maintain. Many of the marketing campaign pages like this are specific to the scene and will not be changed frequently, just do it with the most basic.
doing the H5 activity page is targeted and will not be changed frequently. You can usually use js css html. The framework doesn't feel necessary.
if you have a lot of marketing h5s and need a set of projects to manage multiple h5s, you can come to here
.
