4 ms·

Most annoying is the need to write in ES6/Babel today, and all these js hipsters that really believe this is the future of web development. I totally hate Babel

by uranian 10y ago

Most annoying is the need to write in ES6/Babel today, and all these js hipsters that really believe this is the future of web development. I totally hate Babel with it's dozens of Webpack patches/plugins to make it work. Oh, and don't forget your (Airbnb style) linter if you want to be politically correct. No one needs Babel to write stellar code IMHO. Unfortunately it is not about the quality of the code you write, it is about being politically correct. This whole ES6/ES7 thing is much based on what Coffeescript, Livescript, etc.. already did much better more than 5 years ago. And I dare to guess that most of the Babel proponents don't even realise it's just a transpiler that they will need till the end of the projects live. note: I expect serious down votes as opposing Babel is almost a serious crime nowadays and proves my unlimited stupidity. No, web development is not really exiting nowadays, it is more terrifying, where the hype goes tomorrow? Maybe soon I will be forced to write in MS Typescript if I want to be taken seriously. Same counts for Redux because Flux is so 2014.. you must be very brave not using Redux! I can go on and on, way too many examples.. Finding a web developer job now is particularly about complying to made up standards that become more complex every day. And I've seen quit some horrible code bases that perfectly comply! It's a very sad reality.

grzm 10y ago
I think you make some very good points. Focusing on a particular toolchain because it's popular rather than the benefits it provides in development and the result is misguided. When developers first start out there are a lot of choices to make, and they may not have the foundation or experience to make the decision they would likely make a few years down the road. Often you're happy when you get something working and repeatedly so. In the JavaScript community there's been an explosion of tools, tool chains, libraries, module systems; without a lot of experience, it's very easy to be overwhelmed. Criteria for choice can include the availability of easy-to-understand tutorials as much as understanding the motivations and design decisions and limitations of the tools themselves. Some people are very good at writing blog posts describing what they've done, better than conveying the underlying concepts. I don't want to necessarily fault them for that, as I think there's often a sincere desire to show people a way that works for them. Rather than focussing solely on what's wrong, it's very important to also include options you think are better, and why. Looking down your nose at others, describing them as js hipsters using politically correct tools does no one any good, and makes it even less likely people will listen to what you have to say. And on HN, expressing the expectation of down votes is a guaranteed method of receiving them; it's against the guidelines and adds nothing to your comment. There are a lot of choices in the web development space today. The desire to standardize on something (such as the push for Babel and Webpack) is laudable in that they recognize that so much choice is not necessarily good: it makes it more difficult to decide what to use (sometimes good enough is just that), and splits resources that may otherwise be used to improve a more limited number of options. That's not to say Babel and Webpack are the best options: just that I understand the motivation for standardization and push to popularize a few (rather than all) options.
_greim_ 10y ago
I agree there's a lot of cargo-culting and bandwagon-ism nowadays. It's the result of there being lots of beginners who just want a recipe they can apply to produce a certain result. I don't blame them for wanting that or for being beginners, or for being frustrated at the obvious madness of it all. What bothers me is the apparent lack of interest these people seem to have in understanding the history and trade-offs that got us here.
- gglitch 10y ago
  I'd love a factual and accurate report of that history and those trade-offs, even a book-length one on paper. Do you know of one? I'm not trying to do a dissertation on the subject, and it's not my day job, so weaving my own unreliable history out of Google searches and cranky blog posts is not ideal.
dang 10y ago
> note: I expect serious down votes as opposing Babel is almost a serious crime nowadays and proves my unlimited stupidity. This breaks the HN guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). Please don't.
pitaj 10y ago
Let's establish a couple things right off the start: 1. You can write great applications without the latest language features 2. The latest language features do make development easier Babel is necessary for #2 if you don't have control over the browser which your users use to access your site. If you don't want to transpile, don't. It's as simple as that. However, the future of JS is the future of web development, that is indisputable. Using Babel allows you to stay closer to the future and/or use these great new language features. You also brought up TypeScript. 3. Types make development much easier TypeScript is a combination of types and a transpiler for the ability to use the latest ES features. Types are great, providing: - Better self-documenting code - More safety - IDE interop to provide completion, as seen in VS Code > note: I expect serious down votes as opposing Babel is almost a serious crime nowadays and proves my unlimited stupidity. From the HN Guidelines: "Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downvote you or proclaim that you expect to get downvoted." > Maybe soon I will be forced to write in MS Typescript if I want to be taken seriously. Many would say that someone should be forced to write in a typed language in general in order to be taken seriously.
- uranian 10y ago
  typical.. I'm very glad you're not the person 'establishing things' in our team. > If you don't want to transpile, don't. It's as simple as that. Are you kidding? Please tell me your estimation of how many developers write in ES6/ES7 without using Babel or other transpiler??? You don't really need to tell me what Types are about, I have a long standing C/C++ background. And I really don't need Typescript. I use dynamic type checking based on ES3, does the job flawlessly already for years. Very rare for me to have a type related bug. I'm always wary of people that preach Typescript; what code do they write to get in so much trouble with types? > Many would say that someone should be forced to write in a typed language in general in order to be taken seriously. omg.. 'forced', this is bad. I'm only looking forward to webassembly, that will be the real game changer and the end of JS as we know it.
  - pitaj 10y ago
    > > If you don't want to transpile, don't. It's as simple as that. > Are you kidding? Please tell me your estimation of how many developers write in ES6/ES7 without using Babel or other transpiler??? I was implying that you simply don't use ES6.
Can_Not 10y ago
>>Ask HN: What is the most exciting development in your field right now? >Complains about everything in the last 4 years that makes JavaScript not suck. Sorry that all of these optional features and optional addons ruined your day.

by uranian 10y ago

grzm 10y ago

I think you make some very good points. Focusing on a particular toolchain because it's popular rather than the benefits it provides in development and the result is misguided. When developers first start out there are a lot of choices to make, and they may not have the foundation or experience to make the decision they would likely make a few years down the road. Often you're happy when you get something working and repeatedly so. In the JavaScript community there's been an explosion of tools, tool chains, libraries, module systems; without a lot of experience, it's very easy to be overwhelmed. Criteria for choice can include the availability of easy-to-understand tutorials as much as understanding the motivations and design decisions and limitations of the tools themselves. Some people are very good at writing blog posts describing what they've done, better than conveying the underlying concepts. I don't want to necessarily fault them for that, as I think there's often a sincere desire to show people a way that works for them. Rather than focussing solely on what's wrong, it's very important to also include options you think are better, and why. Looking down your nose at others, describing them as js hipsters using politically correct tools does no one any good, and makes it even less likely people will listen to what you have to say. And on HN, expressing the expectation of down votes is a guaranteed method of receiving them; it's against the guidelines and adds nothing to your comment. There are a lot of choices in the web development space today. The desire to standardize on something (such as the push for Babel and Webpack) is laudable in that they recognize that so much choice is not necessarily good: it makes it more difficult to decide what to use (sometimes good enough is just that), and splits resources that may otherwise be used to improve a more limited number of options. That's not to say Babel and Webpack are the best options: just that I understand the motivation for standardization and push to popularize a few (rather than all) options.

_greim_ 10y ago

I agree there's a lot of cargo-culting and bandwagon-ism nowadays. It's the result of there being lots of beginners who just want a recipe they can apply to produce a certain result. I don't blame them for wanting that or for being beginners, or for being frustrated at the obvious madness of it all. What bothers me is the apparent lack of interest these people seem to have in understanding the history and trade-offs that got us here.

gglitch 10y ago
I'd love a factual and accurate report of that history and those trade-offs, even a book-length one on paper. Do you know of one? I'm not trying to do a dissertation on the subject, and it's not my day job, so weaving my own unreliable history out of Google searches and cranky blog posts is not ideal.

dang 10y ago

> note: I expect serious down votes as opposing Babel is almost a serious crime nowadays and proves my unlimited stupidity. This breaks the HN guidelines (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). Please don't.

pitaj 10y ago

Let's establish a couple things right off the start: 1. You can write great applications without the latest language features 2. The latest language features do make development easier Babel is necessary for #2 if you don't have control over the browser which your users use to access your site. If you don't want to transpile, don't. It's as simple as that. However, the future of JS is the future of web development, that is indisputable. Using Babel allows you to stay closer to the future and/or use these great new language features. You also brought up TypeScript. 3. Types make development much easier TypeScript is a combination of types and a transpiler for the ability to use the latest ES features. Types are great, providing: - Better self-documenting code - More safety - IDE interop to provide completion, as seen in VS Code > note: I expect serious down votes as opposing Babel is almost a serious crime nowadays and proves my unlimited stupidity. From the HN Guidelines: "Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downvote you or proclaim that you expect to get downvoted." > Maybe soon I will be forced to write in MS Typescript if I want to be taken seriously. Many would say that someone should be forced to write in a typed language in general in order to be taken seriously.

uranian 10y ago
typical.. I'm very glad you're not the person 'establishing things' in our team. > If you don't want to transpile, don't. It's as simple as that. Are you kidding? Please tell me your estimation of how many developers write in ES6/ES7 without using Babel or other transpiler??? You don't really need to tell me what Types are about, I have a long standing C/C++ background. And I really don't need Typescript. I use dynamic type checking based on ES3, does the job flawlessly already for years. Very rare for me to have a type related bug. I'm always wary of people that preach Typescript; what code do they write to get in so much trouble with types? > Many would say that someone should be forced to write in a typed language in general in order to be taken seriously. omg.. 'forced', this is bad. I'm only looking forward to webassembly, that will be the real game changer and the end of JS as we know it.
- pitaj 10y ago
  > > If you don't want to transpile, don't. It's as simple as that. > Are you kidding? Please tell me your estimation of how many developers write in ES6/ES7 without using Babel or other transpiler??? I was implying that you simply don't use ES6.

Can_Not 10y ago

>>Ask HN: What is the most exciting development in your field right now? >Complains about everything in the last 4 years that makes JavaScript not suck. Sorry that all of these optional features and optional addons ruined your day.