Live data from Hacker News

Dear JavaScript

medium.com

51–60 of 248 posts

Re: Dear JavaScript

#51
Dear James,

I understand that hearing rants about your brainchild that took so much hard work is hard and depressing. I was in your shoes, too. And being a head of popular open source project is very emotionally unrewarding, to say the least. And thank you for your hard work — like nearly every front end developer out there, I used Babel, and it did it job, eventually.

However, I am one of those people who think that Babel6 is terrible, that it "broke the web", and it marked the beginning of the entire JavaScript fatigue era. Babel6 transition took three days of my life, filled it with misery and rage, lost me a customer, and led to my desire to never touch JavaScript again if I can help it. (I moved to ScalaJS eventually).

I ranted about it, too. Like nearly everyone else, I forgot that there are live people behind every project, with their dreams, hopes and justifications for every decision. I didn't want to attack you personally — I just vented my (very real) rage against Babel6 itself, without thinking anything about its author. So, well, nice to meet you.

And I still stand by what I said. Despite your good intentions, it is still terrible, and unintuitive, and definitely not a "something for everyone", unless frustration is something. And I can't think of any way of fixing it, except of moving to another stack (which I did). If there were many people ranting about Babel6 like I did, (and I can imagine), I am truly sorry for the mental suffering you had to endure.

You are cool. You are significantly more competent developer than I am. I use your software, not the other way around. And it is free. But Babel6 is still terrible, and no input from your side can change my opinion. Or perhaps it could, if you provided some technical justification for what you did. But this article is the request to stop ranting about your work, as it hurts you.

For that, I am sorry.

Re: Dear JavaScript

#52
post #39

Has the author considered that maybe, just maybe, negativity can be justified? Sometimes when one sees people wasting yet another man-decade in yet another attempt to make JavaScript not fundamentally broken the only thing that can possibly work is to say, 'your project is stupid , because you're trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.' If reasoning doesn't work, if polite criticism doesn't work, then maybe b…

...But that's not even what he's talking about here. He's talking about people continually insulting him and his project over the internet, without even discussing the grievances they may have, legitimate though they may be.

Also, JS isn't as fundamentally broken as you think. C is far more fundamentally broken than JS, and you like C, right? I mean, I kinda like C, too. But it's broken.

Re: Dear JavaScript

#53
post #15
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check out this comment from one of the devs behind Homebrew from HN 10 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13035438 (this was in response that he might be a good target to sue over putting Google Analytics in Homebrew). Yes, we need to treat our open source devs better. HN is not innocent.

Holy shit. That's just insane. It feels like some people treat open source developers like government employees. Both provide a seemingly "free" service, and when you're not paying it's easy to ask for more and get upset about trivial things. (Of course neither group deserves this kind of thing.)

>It feels like some people treat open source developers like government employees

This is actually a very interesting comparison.

Re: Dear JavaScript

#54
There is no "fix" to this. This is how people work. Some like things some don't, you have to deal with it or look for a more secluded hobby. If you can call it a hobby. Maybe behind every angry post there is a frustrated developer who've thought or been told that XY framework "is-the-shit" and and it will rock the way he works. Then he tries it and faces a series of problems. One consequence might be that he feels stupid, inadequate or incompetent. But there are some who dare to criticize. I thing that's a good thing. The moment when your mainstream project stops receiving criticism is probably the day it's dead. And by criticism I don't mean personal attacks (screw those idiots). By criticism I mean people with constructive feedback. The "angular 2 is terrible" article had plenty of it, besides the title it was a good read and insight how A2 really works.

If you want to reduce developer frustration, then try these things first:

- Write a clear scope what your project is about and how you intend it to used. Many times devs realize that the tool is a bad fit for them only after attempting to use it many times

- Write exceptional, up to date documentation

- Visually display core architecture explanations

- Provide clear getting started examples that work out of the box

- Communicate well breaking changes, updates, milestones

Re: Dear JavaScript

#55
Sounds like OSS projects need a better way to moderate issues. If github had a setting to force issues to go through a moderator feedback/approval cycle before becoming public, it could reduce this behavior. Wouldn't help for Twitter and whatnot, but at least it would help somewhere.

Re: Dear JavaScript

#56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many HN posts about JS devolve into a "I don't like Javascript because I'm a real programmer, not a frontend" slugfest. As someone who is invested in the long-term success of the JS ecosystem, it becomes a lot easier just to remove yourself from the discussion because a lot of the community is so negative about the (older versions) of the language and ecosystem, purely on ideology.

Oh. I thought it devolved into "Use react".

Both actually. Split roughly 50/50.

Re: Dear JavaScript

#57
I don't think I can say much about the article's main point that hasn't already been said. But I do have a question:

Why the flying blue !@#$ would anybody think that Babel 6's Configuration over Convention decision was the wrong way to go? It was absolutely the right thing to do. It made Babel a far more uniform and simple piece of software, and actually made it easier to use.

Why?

Re: Dear JavaScript

#58
post #36
post #17

I was commenting to a colleague the other day how amazed I was at the sheer quantity of github "issues" that I was seeing posted to a few popular open source repositories that were rants about why feature X wasn't available yet or a priority yet, or demanding that someone walk them through some installation issue because the poster couldn't understand (or didn't read) the README. None of the people that posted this s…

regarding your first point: often there doesn't seem to be a dedicated support channel/community. Mailing lists are less and less popular, if one exists its web interface is likely a long way behind GitHub. There are no forums. Some languages have project-independent channels (e.g. message boards for python users will try to help you with whatever library you're messing with right now), but they don't exist for all e…

Project Q&A sites, subreddits, and IRC channels are a pretty good solution to this (based on my experience with Rust for the latter two), as at least it separates "support" from "issues". Doesn't fix toxicity, that requires consistent and effective moderation, another thing Rust does well.

Re: Dear JavaScript

#59
As others have pointed out, people being mean, angry complainers when something doesn't work the way they want it to isn't unique to the programming or open source communities.

I think some of us are bothered by it because we tend to to think of ourselves as logical and rational, and we expect others like us to behave in the same way.

From observing things over the past decade, it appears to me that there are plenty of developers who are willing to fly off the handle and write whiny rants about things that irritate them.

Maybe part of it is that the posts that sound like they're written by a petulant child get the most attention. I often find myself disagreeing with points in them, but have never felt the need to spout insults about libraries and frameworks or their creators.

Up 'til now, I've been content to reply to these rants on HN and Reddit, and try to inject a bit of reason and calm into the discussion. I think it's time to be more courageous.

I'd like to start writing rebuttal blog posts in which I tell the authors they sound like whiny ingrates and demonstrate how they could have written their criticism constructively. I'm just not sure whether trying be be reasonable will actually help the community, or will just get me lots of nasty replies and e-mails.

Re: Dear JavaScript

#60

I do not think that every blog post about a piece of software has to have actionable advice for the maintainers. Sometimes you just want write a review and tell other people that something sucks. It is true, that this is a community where people are working for free and I would personally try to consider that, when I say something online. It is generally good advice to assume, that other people are intelligent, too,…

The thing is, a Hollywood movie is qualitatively different than a FOSS library. In the former case, you are a passive consumer who paid money for a product. In the latter, you are an active member of the JS community, benefiting from the shared work of other developers for free - the only thing they're asking for in payment is a bit of kindness, respect, civility and ideally the occasional contribution. Plus, if there's something wrong with the FOSS project, you have ultimate power to change it as you see fit.

IMHO reviewing FOSS projects as if they were shitty products you purchased is extremely destructive to the FOSS community.

Post reply on HN