How does this differ from Laravel's Vite plugin? I'm curious if there are specific advantages for non-framework PHP apps, or if the component system offers something unique.
When a PHP component changes, does it trigger a full page reload or partial re-render of just that component?
Laravel’s plugin is tightly coupled to Laravel’s build system (Blade, mix manifest, etc.).
vite-plugin-php is framework-agnostic — it works with plain PHP or any other custom setup. In comparison: you do not need custom instructions to load assets, supported by Vite or it's plugins. It basically brings the normal Vite dev experience (HMR, asset resolution) to PHP projects.
The PHP-component system is a simpler way to work with partials and without an additional templating language liek Blade — think of it like JSX, but for PHP. You use JSX like syntax, then it compiles down to normal PHP calls.
Currently, a failed step means you need to restart everything: we have started to add features that save intermediate states so you can recover from there but the recovery part is not finished.
Our main strategy is to make Pipelex easy to integrate with durable workflow orchestrators which are really good at solving that problem. For instance, we'll soon release a plugin integration with temporal.io.
Nice work! Batch generation is underserved for sure.
One question: how do you handle consistency across generations? With Veo's non-deterministic nature, keeping 50 product photos stylistically coherent seems tricky.
thanks mate! Consistency is indeed a problem. The only way in my head to solve it atm is to include similar style image input if you are doing image-to-image, image-to-video gen.
Agree. Starting from Python for-loops is embarrassing baseline. Any decent implementation gets you most of that 5x for free. The interesting part isn't the speedup - it's that AI can do routine optimization unsupervised. That's the actual value prop.
It's quite impressive how many layers of oopsies there are in the React api now.
The curse of being successful as a software project: more people want more from you, but you are not allowed to actually remove cruft, because too many people depend on it.
The entire concept of mitigating un-intended re-rendering by wrapping your bad abstractions in more abstractions is not a category of problem for Svelte devs nor is it inherent to the platform like some inevitably of scale.
React is bad because its foundation is a bad abstraction (v-dom) and it’s spent over decade pilling on more leaky abstractions every year, leading to where we are now — clamoring over a mountain of footguns and indirection.
Clubhouse lost 93% of users from peak. WhatsApp sends 7 billion voice messages daily - but those are DMs, not feeds.
The math doesn't work: reading is 50-80% faster than listening. You can skim 50 text posts in 100 seconds. 50 voice posts? 15 minutes.
Voice works async 1-to-1. You built Twitter where every tweet is a 30-second voicemail nobody has time to listen to.
The transcription proves it - users will read, not listen. Which makes this "text feed with worse UX"