Hi, I'm Hendrix!

Bro why create many genders? When you are first born either you be a girl or a boy, when you grow up you'll be a man or a woman, and when you die, you will be a skeleton. So why create many genders?

Creating accessible interfaces isn't just a nice-to-have—it's essential for ensuring your applications can be used by everyone, regardless of ability. Over the years, I've collected a set of best practices that have helped me build more inclusive user experiences.

First, semantic HTML is your foundation. Using the right elements for the right purpose (buttons for actions, links for navigation, etc.) gives users of assistive technology important context about how to interact with your interface. This is often referred to as "accessibility for free" because proper HTML structure already communicates so much.

Color contrast is another critical consideration. Text should have sufficient contrast with its background to be readable by people with visual impairments. Tools like the WebAIM Contrast Checker can help you verify your color combinations meet WCAG standards.

Keyboard navigation is often overlooked but is crucial for users who can't use a mouse. Ensure all interactive elements can be reached and activated using only the keyboard, and provide visible focus indicators so users know where they are in the interface.

ARIA attributes can enhance accessibility when HTML alone isn't enough, but use them judiciously. The first rule of ARIA is: don't use ARIA if native HTML can do the job. When you do need ARIA, make sure you understand how it affects screen reader announcements.

Finally, test your interfaces with actual assistive technology. Using screen readers like NVDA, JAWS, or VoiceOver will give you insights into how users with disabilities experience your application. It's one thing to check against guidelines, but nothing beats real-world testing.

Building accessible interfaces takes practice, but integrating these practices into your workflow from the beginning makes it much easier. The result is an application that works better for everyone, not just those with disabilities.

State management in React has evolved significantly over the years, moving from centralized stores to more flexible and modular approaches. Let's explore the current landscape and when to use each option.

For simple components with local state, React's built-in useState and useReducer hooks are often all you need. They're lightweight, require no additional dependencies, and are perfect for encapsulated component state.

When state needs to be shared across components, the Context API provides a way to avoid prop drilling. It's built into React and works well for theme data, user information, or any other global state that doesn't change frequently. However, Context isn't optimized for high-frequency updates and can cause unnecessary re-renders.

Redux has long been the go-to for complex global state, especially in large applications. It enforces a strict unidirectional data flow and provides excellent developer tools. With Redux Toolkit, much of the boilerplate has been eliminated, making it more approachable. Redux is still a solid choice for applications with complex state interactions or when you need time-travel debugging.

For a lighter alternative, Zustand has gained popularity for its simplicity and flexibility. It provides a small API surface that's easy to learn, supports middleware, and has excellent performance characteristics. Zustand is a great middle ground between Context and Redux.

Jotai and Recoil take an atomic approach to state management, allowing you to build state up from small, reusable pieces. They're particularly well-suited to applications with complex derived state or where different parts of the state update at different frequencies.

The key to choosing a state management solution is understanding your application's needs. For small to medium applications, starting with useState/useReducer and Context is often sufficient. As complexity grows, evaluate whether the benefits of a third-party library outweigh the cost of the additional dependency.

Remember that different parts of your application can use different state management approaches—you're not locked into a single solution. The best state management is often a combination of techniques, tailored to the specific requirements of each feature.