4 ms·

The problem with the massive amount of churn is that it just doesn't pay off to learn the new, cool thing when it's going to be obsolete in 3 months or less. I

The problem with the massive amount of churn is that it just doesn't pay off to learn the new, cool thing when it's going to be obsolete in 3 months or less. I think all programmers, especially ones who read HN, like to learn new things. It's fun to pick up new languages, learn new paradigms, and experiment with different technologies. What's not fun is learning 10 different ways to handle promises, 4 different build tools, several frameworks, and dozens of new libraries over the course of a year just to keep up. By the time you reach a level of mastery over one of these tools, it's already been replaced by something else! I mean it's great that the tools are getting better, but it's really painful to deal with the constant churn. /rant

pavel_lishin 10y ago
Especially when even this article points out that webpack is difficult to set up, and basically requires a helper tool.
danenania 10y ago
The solution is not trying so hard to keep up. Keep your ears open for the major improvements that rise above the noise, but don't feel like you have to be on the cutting edge. Much of the cutting edge is (almost by definition) misguided or overcomplicated. The sweet spot if your goal is to actually build something is taking whatever architecture is currently hip and throwing out about 2/3 of it in exchange for a simpler approach. Then circle back for the fancier libraries a few months later if and when you have a need for them.
george_soros 10y ago
I hear you. Web Assembly just might save us all from this ridiculous JS drive to re-invent things. Pick a language you like to work with on the server side, learn the current best framework for the client side in that language and be happy ever after with enough free time for gardening and feeding goats.
rtpg 10y ago
>it just doesn't pay off to learn the new, cool thing when it's going to be obsolete in 3 months or less. Does this actually happen? If you had learned Angular way back, you would still be in a comfortable situation. New stuff coming in, but it's compatible with the old stuff. Same with React. Had you learned react when it was talked about, you would have gotten, what, at least 2 years worth of value by now? And a lot of the build tools are independent of the tech. Grunt is still fine to use, and people release plugins for it all the time. And here's the last thing: You don't have to spend 6 months to learn a thing. If you want to keep up, read about it for 15 minutes? That should be enough most of the time to get the philosophical differences between tools you know. And if it does intrigue you enough, engage with it. This stuff is progress, if we went the other way we'd still be writing jQuery spaghetti code and having state integrity issues up the wazzoo from callback hell. You don't have to ride every train, but you can at least look at them as they go by.
- adamors 10y ago
  Grunt is actually not still fine to use. I've been burnt by a lot of plugins coming out for Gulp only and now for webpack only. What the GP says is true: if you start using any of these JS tools prepare to switch them out every 6 months.
  - joshmanders 10y ago
    > What the GP says is true: if you start using any of these JS tools prepare to switch them out every 6 months. As a full stack JavaScript developer, the tools I used over 6 months ago are also the tools I use today. Only difference is I left Angular for React. But my build tools are still the same. I use Gulp, SASS and Webpack. You're talking out of your ass if you actually believe something can get to the popularity of Gulp or Webpack and then instantly be "old news" and "not worth using" within 6 months.
    - metamet 10y ago
      I'm with you, but there's a strong point with Grunt vs Gulp. Gulp is the new standard, and it usurped Grunt only how many months ago?
mercurial 10y ago
> What's not fun is learning 10 different ways to handle promises, 4 different build tools, several frameworks, and dozens of new libraries over the course of a year just to keep up. By the time you reach a level of mastery over one of these tools, it's already been replaced by something else! I mean it's great that the tools are getting better, but it's really painful to deal with the constant churn. I feel your pain, but on the other hand: - tools with enough users are not going away, even if they're less actively maintained - it's not like sticking to HTML + jQuery is desirable if you need to build a complex UI

pavel_lishin 10y ago

Especially when even this article points out that webpack is difficult to set up, and basically requires a helper tool.

danenania 10y ago

The solution is not trying so hard to keep up. Keep your ears open for the major improvements that rise above the noise, but don't feel like you have to be on the cutting edge. Much of the cutting edge is (almost by definition) misguided or overcomplicated. The sweet spot if your goal is to actually build something is taking whatever architecture is currently hip and throwing out about 2/3 of it in exchange for a simpler approach. Then circle back for the fancier libraries a few months later if and when you have a need for them.

george_soros 10y ago

I hear you. Web Assembly just might save us all from this ridiculous JS drive to re-invent things. Pick a language you like to work with on the server side, learn the current best framework for the client side in that language and be happy ever after with enough free time for gardening and feeding goats.

rtpg 10y ago

>it just doesn't pay off to learn the new, cool thing when it's going to be obsolete in 3 months or less. Does this actually happen? If you had learned Angular way back, you would still be in a comfortable situation. New stuff coming in, but it's compatible with the old stuff. Same with React. Had you learned react when it was talked about, you would have gotten, what, at least 2 years worth of value by now? And a lot of the build tools are independent of the tech. Grunt is still fine to use, and people release plugins for it all the time. And here's the last thing: You don't have to spend 6 months to learn a thing. If you want to keep up, read about it for 15 minutes? That should be enough most of the time to get the philosophical differences between tools you know. And if it does intrigue you enough, engage with it. This stuff is progress, if we went the other way we'd still be writing jQuery spaghetti code and having state integrity issues up the wazzoo from callback hell. You don't have to ride every train, but you can at least look at them as they go by.

adamors 10y ago
Grunt is actually not still fine to use. I've been burnt by a lot of plugins coming out for Gulp only and now for webpack only. What the GP says is true: if you start using any of these JS tools prepare to switch them out every 6 months.
- joshmanders 10y ago
  > What the GP says is true: if you start using any of these JS tools prepare to switch them out every 6 months. As a full stack JavaScript developer, the tools I used over 6 months ago are also the tools I use today. Only difference is I left Angular for React. But my build tools are still the same. I use Gulp, SASS and Webpack. You're talking out of your ass if you actually believe something can get to the popularity of Gulp or Webpack and then instantly be "old news" and "not worth using" within 6 months.
  - metamet 10y ago
    I'm with you, but there's a strong point with Grunt vs Gulp. Gulp is the new standard, and it usurped Grunt only how many months ago?

mercurial 10y ago

> What's not fun is learning 10 different ways to handle promises, 4 different build tools, several frameworks, and dozens of new libraries over the course of a year just to keep up. By the time you reach a level of mastery over one of these tools, it's already been replaced by something else! I mean it's great that the tools are getting better, but it's really painful to deal with the constant churn. I feel your pain, but on the other hand: - tools with enough users are not going away, even if they're less actively maintained - it's not like sticking to HTML + jQuery is desirable if you need to build a complex UI