3 ms·
I feel like this speaks volumes about JavaScript. The need to have all these libraries to do relatively ordinary tasks which ought to be easy enough with a good
by Blackstone4 8y ago
I feel like this speaks volumes about JavaScript. The need to have all these libraries to do relatively ordinary tasks which ought to be easy enough with a good standard library.
- gear54rus 8y agoNo matter what you include, someone always comes and says this broad useless generalization. What of this looks like it should be standard? https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1600/1*opTXAh1ohEAVpBM4WffuMQ.png https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1600/1*opTXAh1ohEAVpBM4W...
- Blackstone4 8y agoIf you take your line of reasoning to it's logical conclusion, you could argue that JS should not have a standard library. Yes there will always be critics but it doesn't mean that some options aren't better than others. The small JS and node standard libraries and extensive NPM module universe are both a strength and a weakness. It means developers can do things in JS that they can't in other languages and vice versa. I guess its a matter of preference and right tool for the job. When I started with JS, I was excited by the number of modules and ease of use. I feel like I've grown tired of that and would rather have a decent standard library so I can focus on coding rather than finding the right module and managing my package.json/yarn/npn/webpack.
- gear54rus 8y agoYou don't need to take this to non-logical extreme. Node standard library is in no way limited, I guess we just see the world differently. I'd never prefer one 'true' way (aka opinionated bs) to organic ecosystem competition.