Man. People complain that JavaScript sucks as a language and then complain when it evolves too quickly to appease these same people.
Oh well.
Programs are dead, and JavaScript has killed them
151–160 of 216 posts
Re: Programs are dead, and JavaScript has killed them
#152Tools like Babel emerged to bridge a compatibility gap between the evolving ECMAScript specification and the browser lacking behind implementing the new features. Then some "smart" people decided Babel would be a good thing to transform anything and thus React, JSX and the like were born. The problem emerged and took foot when we stopped polyfilling and transpiling the compability gap and instead built further on the…
> The standards are backwards compatible and evergreen. They are definitely not backwards compatible. Most of the modern web will be broken on older devices. A few of the newer standards couldn't even be properly polyfilled on some older browsers. And some of them are definitely not evergreen. Marquee is the one that will definitely spring to mind. But then there was Custom Elements V0 that Youtube was rebuilt in and…
> Most of the modern web will be broken on older devices.
And the super heavy js websites will work?
Re: Programs are dead, and JavaScript has killed them
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
> well most of ideas wear out rather quickly and are not useful for centuries I'm not a religious person, but already a couple thousand years ago the bible folk rightly identified that there is nothing new under the sun. Or as BNL eloquently puts it, "it's all been done before." I don't know how we could ever quantify it or qualify it, but I would guess that most ideas stick around.
Couple hundred years ago people were still thinking that Earth is in the center of the universe :) Ideas that survived is survivorship bias - everyday life just shifts around.
> Couple hundred years ago people were still thinking that Earth is in the center of the universe :)
They were? Were they educated people or just some random people?
Re: Programs are dead, and JavaScript has killed them
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
most python modules do not have so many dependencies, and tend to have a stable api. Bugs happen but it's by no means a constant thing.
Python has a completely different issue and that is that its dependencies on c extensions makes cross platform or cross version packaging a terrible thing. This is why I get a bit puzzled when people complain about the Java build system. It's so much saner in comparison to the scripting languages, and arguably better than Go or Rust (though I'll take any of the three over Python or JS).
> Python has a completely different issue and that is that its dependencies on c extensions makes cross platform or cross version packaging a terrible thing.
Well java has no way to do a unix socket unless we rely on a C extension so it's hardly better in this respect.
Re: Programs are dead, and JavaScript has killed them
#155Is python and pip more stable in this regard? I need a scripting language with a robust library, and I’ve seem first hand how difficult NPM projects can become.
pypi is full of awful amateur libraries that don't work very well.
Finding a good one among 20 crappy clones is a chore, and the most downloaded ones are not necessarily the best options.
I personally just stick with whatever is on my distribution (debian) and very very seldom venture out to using something directly from pypi.
In any case python doesn't require many libraries, so most of my projects require no more than 2 or 3 dependencies. Where js projects require 50, so the risk of issues from a dependency changing API is not as big.
Re: Programs are dead, and JavaScript has killed them
#156> During the past 5–6 years of my JavaScript experience, every time I wanted to go back to any of my projects—from tiny to big, server-side or front-end—there was always a challenge, a problem to tackle or an obstacle to overcome before I can update or sometimes even just run my program. why i moved mostly from writing node cmd tools to using bash. don't need to go on a bunch of side missions every time i run npm ins…
The best thing about bash is portability indeed. Node requires an entire runtime, while Rust may have a problem with library versions and requires a heavy toolchain too to recompile. I use it for small CLI tools but I could not envision anything over 1k LOC in bash. I think the ideal would be a language that introduced a nicer syntax and compiled it to bash. I wonder if there's anything like that...
Re: Programs are dead, and JavaScript has killed them
#157Just run “npm ci” next time.
Re: Programs are dead, and JavaScript has killed them
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is terrible advice, on the order of “learn assembly, not C”, or “real geeks compile their kernels with customizations”. It’s a tale as old as time: the “smart” people are actually dumb, I am the smart one, and so I will build my own framework from the ground up of JS, HTML, CSS as part of my work. And maybe eventually I’ll release it to the world. This is why the JS community is the way it is - lots of folks thi…
To compare plain JS and React/stuff with C and assembly, that is a bit much. The comparison of things from so fundamentally different ecosystems is not going to yield a convincing argument. "Smart" people are actually dump, if they use an overblown framework for something as simple as a switch on a website and thereby destroy normal browser functionality, because most of them do not actually know how to use their ham…
> if they use an overblown framework for something as simple as a switch on a website and thereby destroy normal browser functionality
Likely not what you meant, but FYI there is no native "switch" control in HTML - you do need to use a CSS or JS framework if you want something like iOS switch control. QED
Re: Programs are dead, and JavaScript has killed them
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
To compare plain JS and React/stuff with C and assembly, that is a bit much. The comparison of things from so fundamentally different ecosystems is not going to yield a convincing argument. "Smart" people are actually dump, if they use an overblown framework for something as simple as a switch on a website and thereby destroy normal browser functionality, because most of them do not actually know how to use their ham…
> if they use an overblown framework for something as simple as a switch on a website and thereby destroy normal browser functionality Likely not what you meant, but FYI there is no native "switch" control in HTML - you do need to use a CSS or JS framework if you want something like iOS switch control. QED
CheckBox is a native HTML switch control.
Change my mind.jpg
Re: Programs are dead, and JavaScript has killed them
#160Tools like Babel emerged to bridge a compatibility gap between the evolving ECMAScript specification and the browser lacking behind implementing the new features. Then some "smart" people decided Babel would be a good thing to transform anything and thus React, JSX and the like were born. The problem emerged and took foot when we stopped polyfilling and transpiling the compability gap and instead built further on the…
This attitude usually results in a company inventing some bespoke abstraction/framework whilst saying they are following standards.