6 ms·

It's no worse than any other ecosystem. Modern Java development is just as prickly -- the only difference is the complexity is more established. JS is still ver

by ng12 10y ago

It's no worse than any other ecosystem. Modern Java development is just as prickly -- the only difference is the complexity is more established. JS is still very "wild-west" because the community is still making rapid progress towards an ideal environment.

xwowsersx 10y ago
You may be right, but I'm not sure I totally agree. Maybe this is exactly what you meant, but I think the complexities are different. Java is inherently complex, I'll give you that, but in JS and FE development in general, it seems like the most basic building blocks are constantly being reinvented...large, open questions on basic stuff.
- vcarl 10y ago
  > large, open questions on basic stuff. I've commented on this subject before[0], I think the past few years of web development has largely been about answering basic questions. Now there are well tested answers to those questions. I'm sure people will still reinvent these wheels, but now you don't have to when working on a large project. Babel, Webpack et al are more useful when you're building a web-app, something generally comparable to a native app. The toolchain is complex, sure, but no more complex than what xcode or Android Studio do for you. I think the difference is that this has been a community effort, rather than a corporation assembling a product, so a) there are more people sharing opinions and b) the disagreements and exploration has been more public. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12828042 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12828042
- seangrogg 10y ago
  The issues with FE are twofold: browser incompatibilities and user expectations. The first is becoming easier over time (stop using IE, please). The second is an ongoing arms race. Writing front end code is like writing a CLI. It starts off really easy - you have a use case (whether that's a page about your cat or a script that echoes "meow"), you solve for it, you show it off. But then people ask for it to do other things. So you have to extend the code - perhaps we need to add flags so users see dog stuff instead of cat stuff. Oh, now users want an actual ascii animal to see so we cater to that. Now they want to name it so let's accept input somehow. They want to issue commands to it so let's deal with parsing and conditional branches. The problem is that we have to deal with constant changes from browsers, from stakeholders, and from users. Stakeholders want certain features from our programs, users expect a certain standard of performance, and browsers hamper us with incompatibilities. So we build libraries that solve some of these problems. jQuery helped us build websites, but then web apps became a thing. Backbone/Ember/Angular helped us build web decent web-apps, but then performance became a thing. React/Angular2/Ember2/Vue help us build performant applications... until the next thing. I think the real problem are the choices people opt-in to. I use React and don't have JavaScript fatigue - but I've also chosen not to use JSX, Babel, Webpack, SSR, live reloading, linting, typing, automated deployment, trello, TravisCI, Docker, k8s, etc. Just libraries imported with script tags, writing ES5 (current standard, 100% implementation), using React.createElement and I've had no issues. People may opt-in to reinvention and questioning basics, but there are plenty of individuals that get by just fine.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
mhd 10y ago
Java and C++ always end up as the baselines for comparisons, besides both not being exactly being the poster boys of their respective fields. Just because C++ compiles even slower or a non-standard Maven setup is more inscrutable doesn't exactly praise the alternative. We should stop being so content with not being/using the worst.
ern 10y ago
I disagree that the constant churn in FE/JS is necessarily a sign of "rapid progress", rather than a lack of strong stewardship/leadership leading to people reinventing the wheel. I haven't worked with Java for a long time, but from what I've been hearing from colleagues who are exploring writing production software with it, .NET Core is currently a bit of a mess, showing that even coherent dev stories can easily slip into disorder.
- ng12 10y ago
  > a lack of strong stewardship/leadership leading to people reinventing the wheel There's lots of strong leadership. React, Angular, Vue, Ember, etc. all have very intelligent, hard-working people backing them. These frameworks aren't "reinventing the wheel", it's the complete opposite: the community has finally freed itself of jQuery/global scope/imperative DOM and these frameworks are all pushing the border in one way or another.
- gotofritz 10y ago
  > I disagree that the constant churn in FE/JS is necessarily a sign of "rapid progress", It's the field that is progressing rapidly. Browsers are constantly adding new APIs, problems are being solved, etc. The difference is that it's open source > a lack of strong stewardship/leadership You can't have leadership in a field which has no owner. It's not like Oracle owning Java and deciding what happens with it. > people reinventing the wheel. This is a stereotype by people who don't really know the subject. Every new tool improves on the previous one. For example, grunt was the first JS build tool, it had some issues (huge configurations, and speed) some someone invented gulp, which uses streams for speed and code instead of configuration. But streams don't handle splitting files in bundles and other problems so well, so webpack was invented. There are overlaps but they all solve different problems, and all improve on the previous generation. They are not "reinventing the wheel"
  - douche 10y ago
    How many times do we have to rewrite make in nodeJS?
flukus 10y ago
> JS is still very "wild-west" because the community is still making rapid progress towards an ideal environment. Most of the churn seems to come from people reinventing the wheel over and over again.
- ng12 10y ago
  Could you elaborate? I hear that a lot but I suspect it only comes from people who don't do a lot of web development.
  - flukus 10y ago
    Look at the number of binding/UI frameworks, look at the package managers, look at the number of unit test libraries, look at the number of build tools. Many get reinvented in a bubble when there are plenty of options already. Now half (maybe more) of the libraries are being written in languages that aren't javascript so now there are multiple competing ecosystems on top of javascript. And then you have things like angular creating churn within the framework.
    - ng12 10y ago
      So the argument is essentially "there's a lot of stuff I don't really understand, a lot of it must be redundant"? React isn't just Angular with a different name -- they have fundamentally different views on how web development should be done. They also fit different use cases (Angular is a one-stop-shop, React is minimalist by design). Same thing with the build systems. Add in the fact that a lot of this wasn't possible until recently (i.e. Webpack is fundamentally enabled by ES6-style imports) and of course things are going to change rapidly. > Now half (maybe more) of the libraries are being written in languages that aren't javascript so now there are multiple competing ecosystems on top of javascript. I'm not sure what you mean by this. Elm-html is the only example I can think of that is non-Javascript. If you're referring to Angular2 being Typescript you can still use it just fine with regular JS.
      - flukus 10y ago

by ng12 10y ago

xwowsersx 10y ago

You may be right, but I'm not sure I totally agree. Maybe this is exactly what you meant, but I think the complexities are different. Java is inherently complex, I'll give you that, but in JS and FE development in general, it seems like the most basic building blocks are constantly being reinvented...large, open questions on basic stuff.

vcarl 10y ago
> large, open questions on basic stuff. I've commented on this subject before[0], I think the past few years of web development has largely been about answering basic questions. Now there are well tested answers to those questions. I'm sure people will still reinvent these wheels, but now you don't have to when working on a large project. Babel, Webpack et al are more useful when you're building a web-app, something generally comparable to a native app. The toolchain is complex, sure, but no more complex than what xcode or Android Studio do for you. I think the difference is that this has been a community effort, rather than a corporation assembling a product, so a) there are more people sharing opinions and b) the disagreements and exploration has been more public. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12828042 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12828042
seangrogg 10y ago
The issues with FE are twofold: browser incompatibilities and user expectations. The first is becoming easier over time (stop using IE, please). The second is an ongoing arms race. Writing front end code is like writing a CLI. It starts off really easy - you have a use case (whether that's a page about your cat or a script that echoes "meow"), you solve for it, you show it off. But then people ask for it to do other things. So you have to extend the code - perhaps we need to add flags so users see dog stuff instead of cat stuff. Oh, now users want an actual ascii animal to see so we cater to that. Now they want to name it so let's accept input somehow. They want to issue commands to it so let's deal with parsing and conditional branches. The problem is that we have to deal with constant changes from browsers, from stakeholders, and from users. Stakeholders want certain features from our programs, users expect a certain standard of performance, and browsers hamper us with incompatibilities. So we build libraries that solve some of these problems. jQuery helped us build websites, but then web apps became a thing. Backbone/Ember/Angular helped us build web decent web-apps, but then performance became a thing. React/Angular2/Ember2/Vue help us build performant applications... until the next thing. I think the real problem are the choices people opt-in to. I use React and don't have JavaScript fatigue - but I've also chosen not to use JSX, Babel, Webpack, SSR, live reloading, linting, typing, automated deployment, trello, TravisCI, Docker, k8s, etc. Just libraries imported with script tags, writing ES5 (current standard, 100% implementation), using React.createElement and I've had no issues. People may opt-in to reinvention and questioning basics, but there are plenty of individuals that get by just fine.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

mhd 10y ago

Java and C++ always end up as the baselines for comparisons, besides both not being exactly being the poster boys of their respective fields. Just because C++ compiles even slower or a non-standard Maven setup is more inscrutable doesn't exactly praise the alternative. We should stop being so content with not being/using the worst.

ern 10y ago

I disagree that the constant churn in FE/JS is necessarily a sign of "rapid progress", rather than a lack of strong stewardship/leadership leading to people reinventing the wheel. I haven't worked with Java for a long time, but from what I've been hearing from colleagues who are exploring writing production software with it, .NET Core is currently a bit of a mess, showing that even coherent dev stories can easily slip into disorder.

ng12 10y ago
> a lack of strong stewardship/leadership leading to people reinventing the wheel There's lots of strong leadership. React, Angular, Vue, Ember, etc. all have very intelligent, hard-working people backing them. These frameworks aren't "reinventing the wheel", it's the complete opposite: the community has finally freed itself of jQuery/global scope/imperative DOM and these frameworks are all pushing the border in one way or another.
gotofritz 10y ago
> I disagree that the constant churn in FE/JS is necessarily a sign of "rapid progress", It's the field that is progressing rapidly. Browsers are constantly adding new APIs, problems are being solved, etc. The difference is that it's open source > a lack of strong stewardship/leadership You can't have leadership in a field which has no owner. It's not like Oracle owning Java and deciding what happens with it. > people reinventing the wheel. This is a stereotype by people who don't really know the subject. Every new tool improves on the previous one. For example, grunt was the first JS build tool, it had some issues (huge configurations, and speed) some someone invented gulp, which uses streams for speed and code instead of configuration. But streams don't handle splitting files in bundles and other problems so well, so webpack was invented. There are overlaps but they all solve different problems, and all improve on the previous generation. They are not "reinventing the wheel"
- douche 10y ago
  How many times do we have to rewrite make in nodeJS?

flukus 10y ago

> JS is still very "wild-west" because the community is still making rapid progress towards an ideal environment. Most of the churn seems to come from people reinventing the wheel over and over again.

ng12 10y ago
Could you elaborate? I hear that a lot but I suspect it only comes from people who don't do a lot of web development.
- flukus 10y ago
  Look at the number of binding/UI frameworks, look at the package managers, look at the number of unit test libraries, look at the number of build tools. Many get reinvented in a bubble when there are plenty of options already. Now half (maybe more) of the libraries are being written in languages that aren't javascript so now there are multiple competing ecosystems on top of javascript. And then you have things like angular creating churn within the framework.
  - ng12 10y ago
    So the argument is essentially "there's a lot of stuff I don't really understand, a lot of it must be redundant"? React isn't just Angular with a different name -- they have fundamentally different views on how web development should be done. They also fit different use cases (Angular is a one-stop-shop, React is minimalist by design). Same thing with the build systems. Add in the fact that a lot of this wasn't possible until recently (i.e. Webpack is fundamentally enabled by ES6-style imports) and of course things are going to change rapidly. > Now half (maybe more) of the libraries are being written in languages that aren't javascript so now there are multiple competing ecosystems on top of javascript. I'm not sure what you mean by this. Elm-html is the only example I can think of that is non-Javascript. If you're referring to Angular2 being Typescript you can still use it just fine with regular JS.
    - flukus 10y ago