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

High-Level Is the Goal

bvisness.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 158 posts

Re: High-Level Is the Goal

#71

Post by twelvedogs »

throwup238 wrote: post #26
twelvedogs wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

jquery was an unoptimised mess? it's like 30k minimised and just bridged a bunch of functionality that browsers lacked as well as providing a generic api that let you (often) ignore per-browser implementation and testing of your code there's no reason to blame it for the types of websites being made either, it doesn't really provide enough functionality to influence the type of site you use it on

Since when did we start using file size as a measure of efficiency or optimization? Off the top of my head: $() CSS parsing and DOM traversal was way slower than querySelector or getElementById, both of which predate jquery by years . Every $('.my-class') created wrapped objects with overhead. Something like $('#myButton').click(fn) involved creating an intermediate object just to attach an event listener you could’v…

> By the early-2010s most of the library was dead weight

absolutely correct this is because a lot of the shit jquery did was good and people built it into the browser because of that

putting jquery into a site now would be insane but at the time it pushed forward the web by quite a leap

Re: High-Level Is the Goal

#72

Post by [deleted] »

wiseowise wrote: post #62
cyber_kinetist wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not bad for mobile apps, but still sucks a lot for desktop support. Also, really wished they've opted for a more general language like C# rather than Dart - but that's inevitable since Google needed to make use of their Dart language after they've failed to standardize it on the Web (and I think they don't want to use a language developed by Microsoft of all companies)

They've picked Dart because it was the only language that could have small aot binaries, hot reload capable runtime without compromise and most importantly because they could influence development of the language. C# is one of the worst choices they could make at the time.

[deleted]

Re: High-Level Is the Goal

#73

Post by zkmon »

I would say 80% of the software quality issues come from the context and constraints defined by the requirements complexity, design choices, stack selection, infra decisions, org processes and so on. A lot of this context is tied to org policies and non-technical decisions. AI is not going to redefine this context. It can only increase code production and code level quality. But the source of 80% of the issues remain intact.

Re: High-Level Is the Goal

#74

Post by Escapado »

fullstackchris wrote: post #61
Escapado wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate the state of affairs. That said my guess is what we „gained“ is tons of telemetry, tracking and the likes, engineers not needing to think about performance to get a feature out, which absolutely lowers the bar to entry, high level abstractions and ux and visual bells and whistles of varying importance and quality (infinite scrolling, streaming updates, image blend modes, blur effects, scroll timeline animation…

Then go ahead and write vanilla JS and raw HTML! No one is asking you to use any of these bad "state of affairs". If you do build a 100+ page SaaS app without any framework, let me know, I'd love to see how it works.

My clients are. I do web dev for a living and I use these frameworks day in and day out. It’s not even that I dislike the dev ex on most of them and I’ve seen a lot of good code and bad code and I don’t even wanna blame anyone in particular for the situation we are in. I think my comment was more of a dig at the world we live in than anything else.

Re: High-Level Is the Goal

#75

Post by imtringued »

cocoto wrote: post #58
cyber_kinetist wrote: post #11

I think the real conclusion is: someone has to make a native cross-platform desktop UI framework that doesn't suck. (Yeah Qt exists, but it really sucks...) Until then, everyone will default to just using the browser for a desktop app, and the beatings will continue. Because of this, I'm really looking forward for PanGUI to step up ( https://www.pangui.io/ ), their UI framework is very promising and I would start usi…

I have yet to find a cross-platform UI framework that really feels native on Gnome. The reality is that there is no shortcut for native UI on all platforms, you have to use the “official” framework (e.g. GTK for Gnome). In my opinion the only softwares that should use a custom framework are professional grade apps where custom workflows can’t fit the native UI (e.g. Blender). Despite all the noise about native cross-…

This correct. What's actually needed is a modernized wxWidgets. The goal of the GUI framework should be to find an architecture that is maximally compatible with the native Windows, GTK, QT, Mac OS UI frameworks/libraries plus a simple way to accommodate minor platform differences.

Re: High-Level Is the Goal

#76

Post by flumpcakes »

teiferer wrote: post #67

> a gigantic manual that lists every property of the system in excruciating detail, which is totally worthless for learning and barely usable as reference. It's the only usable form of reference! I want all the details to be presented in a reference. Where else? > low-level tools are terrible too It seems to me the author is confusing lack of familiarity with lack of existence. There are lots of fantastic tools out t…

> It's the only usable form of reference! I want all the details to be presented in a reference. Where else?

I guess it's like a dictionary: it's only useful if you know the word you want to look up, rather than reading through every definition until you find the function/library/ability that you want. I do agree though, when I need to look something up, I do want it in great detail - it just isn't a very good learning resource.

> It seems to me the author is confusing lack of familiarity with lack of existence. There are lots of fantastic tools out there, you just need to learn them. They don't know them, so conclude they don't exist.

Can you give some examples? The author made a compelling argument on how easy it is to use the browser debugger. I would be of great interest for something similar.

> We already have all that.

I've only seen these for simple python applications or web development, never in any 'low level' space. And certainly not for doing anything interesting in the low level space (something that is not just a C++ language tutorial).

Re: High-Level Is the Goal

#77

Post by flumpcakes »

jbritton wrote: post #19

The Reddit example is about two different design choices. The DOM is a tree of state that needs to stay in sync with your app state. So how to make that happen without turning your code into a mess. The old Reddit had to first construct the DOM and then for every state change, determine what DOM nodes need to change, find them and update them. Knowing what needs to change gets ugly in a lot of apps. The other alterna…

> The web has complexity also of client/server with long delays and syncing client/server and DOM state, and http protocol. Desktop apps and game engines don’t have these problems.

What part of hiding a comment requires a HTTP round trip? In 200ms you could do 20 round trips.

Re: High-Level Is the Goal

#79

Post by graemep »

cocoto wrote: post #58
cyber_kinetist wrote: post #11

I think the real conclusion is: someone has to make a native cross-platform desktop UI framework that doesn't suck. (Yeah Qt exists, but it really sucks...) Until then, everyone will default to just using the browser for a desktop app, and the beatings will continue. Because of this, I'm really looking forward for PanGUI to step up ( https://www.pangui.io/ ), their UI framework is very promising and I would start usi…

I have yet to find a cross-platform UI framework that really feels native on Gnome. The reality is that there is no shortcut for native UI on all platforms, you have to use the “official” framework (e.g. GTK for Gnome). In my opinion the only softwares that should use a custom framework are professional grade apps where custom workflows can’t fit the native UI (e.g. Blender). Despite all the noise about native cross-…

> I have yet to find a cross-platform UI framework that really feels native on Gnome. The reality is that there is no shortcut for native UI on all platforms, you have to use the “official” framework (e.g. GTK for Gnome).

The alternative to cross platform frameworks that do not feel completely native on all platforms is to use browsers for desktop apps which do not feel native on any platform. They do not even have similar UIs to each other.

We would be better off using imperfect cross platform frameworks rather than sticking everything in the browser.

I think part of the reason this happens is that users accept it because they are used to web apps so do not expect consistency.

Re: High-Level Is the Goal

#80

Post by torginus »

cyber_kinetist wrote: post #11

I think the real conclusion is: someone has to make a native cross-platform desktop UI framework that doesn't suck. (Yeah Qt exists, but it really sucks...) Until then, everyone will default to just using the browser for a desktop app, and the beatings will continue. Because of this, I'm really looking forward for PanGUI to step up ( https://www.pangui.io/ ), their UI framework is very promising and I would start usi…

Why do you think Qt sucks? Other than the C++ focus, and basically the framework's decision to make you use everything they give you, which is controversial.

But apps made with Qt as an end product don't think suck. Qt is a fully featured and modern and high quality framework.

Post reply on HN