Probably - "Has it occurred* to you you might simply not understand the advantages of this approach?" makes you sound pretty dismissive of the parent comment's points.
Also - as someone who disagrees with you I don't see any compelling points in things like:
> "So when the author says that classic HTML with sprinkled js on top is "easier to develop", I smirk. If it were, developers would not be flocking en masse towards SPAs and the like. Those are gaining traction because they are easier to develop and easier to maintain. Monumentally so."
You're on HN - there's a huge chunk of us who are attempting to KISS web development. You're not wrong that React and Typescript are wonderful tools - but they're absolutely not the only way to develop things.
Also you may want to address people's worries about SPA development if you want to convince people it's not as bad as they're saying. (like performance - which is a huge reason I keep my light-weight vanilla-style apps the way they are)
I think there's a canyon between outright calling an approach "madness" and simply… understanding its advantages, yes.
Performance is a concern, and that's one of the main reasons why serverside rendering is being adopted as a technique. So when OP berates the existance of SSR, I have to wonder if they understand the larger picture. If it's rude for me to point this out, I apologize for being rude; my point still stands, though.
I don't think the SPA approach is the end-all-be-all but I'm definitely happy to have adopted it for my current project (a mid-size web app mixing classic list views and a few more complex bits and pieces here and there). Had I done it with jQuery, I'd still be building it; and had I done it in my classic hybrid approach, I would not have as many options as I currently do when building new pages/views.
Also - as someone who disagrees with you I don't see any compelling points in things like:
> "So when the author says that classic HTML with sprinkled js on top is "easier to develop", I smirk. If it were, developers would not be flocking en masse towards SPAs and the like. Those are gaining traction because they are easier to develop and easier to maintain. Monumentally so."
You're on HN - there's a huge chunk of us who are attempting to KISS web development. You're not wrong that React and Typescript are wonderful tools - but they're absolutely not the only way to develop things.
Also you may want to address people's worries about SPA development if you want to convince people it's not as bad as they're saying. (like performance - which is a huge reason I keep my light-weight vanilla-style apps the way they are)