4 ms·

I understand the joke but JS isn't a framework, it's a language. "No framework" generally means "poorly-written custom framework". Do you have any code samples

I understand the joke but JS isn't a framework, it's a language. "No framework" generally means "poorly-written custom framework". Do you have any code samples to share from your vanilla JS apps?

unclebucknasty 9y ago
>"No framework" generally means "poorly-written custom framework" This thinking is part of the problem: the idea that not-using a framework almost necessarily means you're writing garbage. >Do you have any code samples to share from your vanilla JS apps? I can show you bad code from popular frameworks too--in particular, hacks to get around the "magic" that frameworks offer. And, invariably, we move on from the framework because now there's "something better". And, we say "that's just progress". No one wants to admit that the last framework was just bad. It's a trend that's been going on for decades in programming, and not just with JS frameworks. Stick around long enough and you'll see exactly how predictable it is.
Silhouette 9y ago
"No framework" generally means "poorly-written custom framework". That is not generally true at all. It might be true if you've got a very inexperienced and unskilled team of developers who don't know how to build a non-trivial application without the structure that a framework brings. However, there must be millions of developers in the world who do have sufficient skill and experience to do that, and these days plenty of those people work in web development. I imagine they can still remember how to do things like basic software design and using libraries, which have been working since long before any of these modern frameworks existed.
- megaman22 9y ago
  I'm afraid you're being terribly optimistic. I'm not totally sure how many millions of people, in absolute numbers, are even competent developers. Out of those, some are web developers, and some subset of those are doing things without frameworks. That leaves a lot of yahoos.
  - Silhouette 9y ago
    Well, yes, there are plenty of incompetent developers too, as there always have been since development broke out of its earliest new-and-specialised-job days. Even so, the idea that not using a framework automatically means you'll produce some poor imitation instead is laughable. The history of software development is replete with examples of people succeeding without those frameworks. We've built countless UIs that way that were much bigger and more complicated than anyone has ever built with Angular or whatever this week's flavour of JS framework is. Maybe there are only thousands of developers working in the web industry who could do it rather than millions. I'm not sure that undermines my real point, since you'd only need a handful of decent devs to make and maintain almost any web front-end I've ever seen. I suspect the true problem is that for various reasons we lose a lot of that experience and skill from the industry far earlier than we should, and then yet another young generation of developers who haven't studied history are doomed to repeat it, badly.

I understand the joke but JS isn't a framework, it's a language. "No framework" generally means "poorly-written custom framework". Do you have any code samples to share from your vanilla JS apps?

unclebucknasty 9y ago

>"No framework" generally means "poorly-written custom framework" This thinking is part of the problem: the idea that not-using a framework almost necessarily means you're writing garbage. >Do you have any code samples to share from your vanilla JS apps? I can show you bad code from popular frameworks too--in particular, hacks to get around the "magic" that frameworks offer. And, invariably, we move on from the framework because now there's "something better". And, we say "that's just progress". No one wants to admit that the last framework was just bad. It's a trend that's been going on for decades in programming, and not just with JS frameworks. Stick around long enough and you'll see exactly how predictable it is.

Silhouette 9y ago

"No framework" generally means "poorly-written custom framework". That is not generally true at all. It might be true if you've got a very inexperienced and unskilled team of developers who don't know how to build a non-trivial application without the structure that a framework brings. However, there must be millions of developers in the world who do have sufficient skill and experience to do that, and these days plenty of those people work in web development. I imagine they can still remember how to do things like basic software design and using libraries, which have been working since long before any of these modern frameworks existed.

megaman22 9y ago
I'm afraid you're being terribly optimistic. I'm not totally sure how many millions of people, in absolute numbers, are even competent developers. Out of those, some are web developers, and some subset of those are doing things without frameworks. That leaves a lot of yahoos.
- Silhouette 9y ago
  Well, yes, there are plenty of incompetent developers too, as there always have been since development broke out of its earliest new-and-specialised-job days. Even so, the idea that not using a framework automatically means you'll produce some poor imitation instead is laughable. The history of software development is replete with examples of people succeeding without those frameworks. We've built countless UIs that way that were much bigger and more complicated than anyone has ever built with Angular or whatever this week's flavour of JS framework is. Maybe there are only thousands of developers working in the web industry who could do it rather than millions. I'm not sure that undermines my real point, since you'd only need a handful of decent devs to make and maintain almost any web front-end I've ever seen. I suspect the true problem is that for various reasons we lose a lot of that experience and skill from the industry far earlier than we should, and then yet another young generation of developers who haven't studied history are doomed to repeat it, badly.