3 ms·
Once you get over the fact that JS is basically a functional language where everything is given a false veneer of the object-oriented I'm not sure it's really a
by Glyptodon 10y ago
Once you get over the fact that JS is basically a functional language where everything is given a false veneer of the object-oriented I'm not sure it's really all that bad. (Which isn't to say that it's good or elegant or isn't filled with badly named things.)
That said, I think the idea that full stack JS is somehow driven by designers or front-end people is mistaken.
I'm pretty sure many businesses find the idea of a "one language" stack appealing and figure it means they can hire less expensive employees. Likewise, I imagine quite a few individual developers hear the same thing and conclude that they could build an entire project with less complexity and some amount of code and library reuse between back and front end.
- cnp 10y ago> Once you get over the fact that JS is basically a functional language where everything is given a false veneer of the object-oriented I'm not sure it's really all that bad. I was going to point this out, too. I haven't written JS in an Object Oriented way in years, and couldn't be happier. Its a beautifully simple language that can do a lot if you approach it right.