Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The abundance of JavaScript libraries

joonaspajunen.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 49 posts

Re: The abundance of JavaScript libraries

#11

Post by raingrove »

georgemcbay wrote: post #2

Probably a controversial opinion to post here (not in that I think it is unique, but rather that I think there will be a divide in people who agree strongly and those who disagree strongly), but I view the JavaScript framework/library situation as a damning indictment of how terrible the language is. A constant churn of attempts to build a solid foundation upon a bed of leaky sand, each ultimately failing because no…

True. In JS land, someone is reinventing module management, object/class model, property bindings, event handling, async helpers, and FP helpers every day.

Re: The abundance of JavaScript libraries

#12

Post by oldmanjay »

coldtea wrote: post #8
ddw wrote: post #3

I still don't understand these "too many frameworks" articles. Is there some power out there that I don't know about that is forcing devs to use the latest framework? We're still allowed to use what we want, no matter how new or old it is, right?

> Is there some power out there that I don't know about that is forcing devs to use the latest framework? Yes. Not all forcing is of the "gun pointed at you" kind. There's also: peer pressure, fads, media coverage, changing demands from employers, etc.

Demands from employers may be considered forcing. The rest, not even close.

Re: The abundance of JavaScript libraries

#13

Post by ddw »

coldtea wrote: post #8
ddw wrote: post #3

I still don't understand these "too many frameworks" articles. Is there some power out there that I don't know about that is forcing devs to use the latest framework? We're still allowed to use what we want, no matter how new or old it is, right?

> Is there some power out there that I don't know about that is forcing devs to use the latest framework? Yes. Not all forcing is of the "gun pointed at you" kind. There's also: peer pressure, fads, media coverage, changing demands from employers, etc.

So like everything else in life then? For instance I just saw a TV commercial that said that Miller Lite is the best beer, but my past experience knows that that is not the case. Surely we can recognize hype and advertisements when we see them.

The only valid excuse here is your employer, but in that case you should be able justify why using X is better than Y. If your non-technical manager insists that you use something that you don't want to because its hip you should be running away from that employer as quickly as possible.

Re: The abundance of JavaScript libraries

#14

Post by Hobotron1 »

oldmanjay wrote: post #12
coldtea wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is there some power out there that I don't know about that is forcing devs to use the latest framework? Yes. Not all forcing is of the "gun pointed at you" kind. There's also: peer pressure, fads, media coverage, changing demands from employers, etc.

Demands from employers may be considered forcing. The rest, not even close.

Peer pressure is definitely force, as Brendan Eich can attest.

Re: The abundance of JavaScript libraries

#15

Post by Hobotron1 »

georgemcbay wrote: post #2

Probably a controversial opinion to post here (not in that I think it is unique, but rather that I think there will be a divide in people who agree strongly and those who disagree strongly), but I view the JavaScript framework/library situation as a damning indictment of how terrible the language is. A constant churn of attempts to build a solid foundation upon a bed of leaky sand, each ultimately failing because no…

Hating on JavaScript seems like a waste of energy anymore- just use GWT (or something similar) and get on with your life.

Re: The abundance of JavaScript libraries

#16

Post by chimeracoder »

ddw wrote: post #3

I still don't understand these "too many frameworks" articles. Is there some power out there that I don't know about that is forcing devs to use the latest framework? We're still allowed to use what we want, no matter how new or old it is, right?

> We're still allowed to use what we want, no matter how new or old it is, right?

Yes, but that means you may be on your own to support it, which means extra up-front work as well as maintenance.

For example, keep in mind that Javascript has changed execution environments and was also originally built without the concept of simply importing other JS files. So over the years, we have had various incompatible ways of packaging and even importing modules[0]. Yes, the situation is improving, and ES6 and polyfills sort of fix this, but let me tell you, it is not fun to deal with old code that assumes a different execution environment and/or build process than the one you're using[1].

[0] e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16521471/relation-betwee...

[1] I really don't want to turn this into a debate on the best way to package or import Javascript projects today - just to point out that yes, there is a cost to using old code, regardless of how good it was at the time it was written.

Re: The abundance of JavaScript libraries

#17

Post by ddw »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #4
ddw wrote: post #3

I still don't understand these "too many frameworks" articles. Is there some power out there that I don't know about that is forcing devs to use the latest framework? We're still allowed to use what we want, no matter how new or old it is, right?

"Is there some power out there that I don't know about that is forcing devs to use the latest framework?" Yes, It's called the Internet. People read articles about how X is the best. thing. evar. And this is perpetuated through many blog posts and, well, a lot of developers actually believe it.

If these JavaScript developers are so gullible to the newest thing it says more about them than the hype cycle.

It's not just that the language sucks in some ways but that the users of it possess so little engineering rigor that they complain about TOO MANY options.

Re: The abundance of JavaScript libraries

#18

Post by FlannelPancake »

pavlov wrote: post #5

JavaScript libraries are a bit like office politics for front-end web developers -- basically something that feels like work and "advances your career", while in truth it's just a way to avoid doing the real work with actual customers.

> libraries are a bit like office politics for front-end web developers -- basically something that feels like work and "advances your career", while in truth it's just a way to avoid doing the real work with actual customers.

That's pretty scary, if true. That sounds very analogous to academic research and the "publish or perish" state of affairs in academia today.

Office politics often will advance your career in any sizable organization. That's why people engage in it. If publishing libraries is an extension of that, then we should be worried about the precedent that's setting for software development as a whole (because it'd be silly to assume that this remains siloed to front-end developers).

Re: The abundance of JavaScript libraries

#19

Post by edwinnathaniel »

ddw wrote: post #17
JustSomeNobody wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Is there some power out there that I don't know about that is forcing devs to use the latest framework?" Yes, It's called the Internet. People read articles about how X is the best. thing. evar. And this is perpetuated through many blog posts and, well, a lot of developers actually believe it.

If these JavaScript developers are so gullible to the newest thing it says more about them than the hype cycle. It's not just that the language sucks in some ways but that the users of it possess so little engineering rigor that they complain about TOO MANY options.

It's no longer "if".

It has becoming a reality slowly...

Re: The abundance of JavaScript libraries

#20

Post by lhnz »

georgemcbay wrote: post #2

Probably a controversial opinion to post here (not in that I think it is unique, but rather that I think there will be a divide in people who agree strongly and those who disagree strongly), but I view the JavaScript framework/library situation as a damning indictment of how terrible the language is. A constant churn of attempts to build a solid foundation upon a bed of leaky sand, each ultimately failing because no…

Can you define this leaky sand or is just bullshit?

There is definitely a lot of churn, but slowly but surely you are seeing certain functional programming approaches winning out.

And the language is progressing so much faster than similar dynamic languages like Python.

Post reply on HN