181–190 of 286 posts
budding dev here! I'm so impressed with the :onhover action of 'Start' button of https://2018.stateofjs.com/ Can anyone provide me a direction how to achieve that?
> JavaScript is always changing. New libraries, new frameworks, new languages… It's part of the fun, No.. NO, it isn't.
The State of What Men Think about Javascript
but seriously how was this survey distributed and is there any explanation for the gender discrepancy?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a fairly vacuous remark, if I'm frank. The problem isn't that you have to learn another framework (although it does become a problem when they're all slightly similar and they start to meld together after the umphteenth, not to mention that learning slows down with age). The problem is that each frameworks brings along new edge cases, new problems and forces you to reinvent tools you already had for this new…
No one forces you to learn anything new if you don't want to. People aren't stupid, if they invent new something (and pour shit ton of effort into it like with Vue or React) they probably have a good reason to (previous PITA first comes to mind). And anyone's "I don't want to learn" whining is in no way a reason to not invent that new something because that will actually slow down progress of tech field (which we can…
I'm sure glad we're advancing beyond the abstractions we have in, say, Cocoa development (which is evolving as well). Seems incredibly selfish to suggest that everyone is incompetent and nothing new is good because you don't want to have to learn new things.
Yet somehow HNers convince themselves that it's scathing sociotechnological criticism of an ecosystem because we tolerate it for some reason. Meanwhile everyone would roll their eyes if you suggested something like "ugh, Objective-C replaced by Swift is like watching Apple read old books."
> JavaScript is always changing. New libraries, new frameworks, new languages… It's part of the fun, No.. NO, it isn't.
I got dizzy from all the options out there so I spent some time improving my knowledge of JavaScript itself instead of focusing on someone else's library.
In the end, those frameworks are "nothing" but a lot of JavaScript patterns stuck together.
Switching from one framework to another should't cause THAT much friction.
A bit sad that d3.js is not even mentioned here. To me it's a solid replacement for any MVC/MVVM framework. I guess it deserves its own category, maybe data model library?
huh? People using d3.js as a library for generic data binding UI? It's technically possible I guess, but the API, with its enter, update, delete paradigms, is very much data viz centric. Not the best option for a general front-end UI library.
https://paradite.github.io/hn-ratio/
Source code (87 lines of JS):
https://github.com/paradite/hn-ratio/blob/master/app.js
A sudoku solver I built with d3.js a few years ago:
http://paradite.github.io/sudoku/
I think d3.js really striked a balance between raw jQuery/JS and full-featured React/Vue.
I would recommend using it for building small-medium sized web apps with heavy data-centric UI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not exactly Yarn or NPM. The problem is that JS is suffering from extreme dependency hell, due to overly fragmentation of modules. It's appalling. It is not a good thing starting a project, doing a install and having hundreds and hundreds of modules on node_modules, some with less then 50 lines of code. Of course things must be modular, but unwraping everything in a folder like this is far from good.
Isn't the issue here basically that JS doesn't have a "standard" authorized library, like Java or C# and NPM has basically become the standard library? Having someone like Google steward a "standard" library (and it could even be distributed using NPM), would pretty much bring JS dependency management at par and beyond Java or C#.
18000 respondents are men vs only 900 women The State of What Men Think about Javascript but seriously how was this survey distributed and is there any explanation for the gender discrepancy?
If so, then it's still "What JS users think of JS."