4 ms·

Confirming. Javascript is really cool when you learn it. However, the moment you dip into libraries you are dependent on someone else's work. Then you run into

Confirming. Javascript is really cool when you learn it. However, the moment you dip into libraries you are dependent on someone else's work. Then you run into a problem because Native doesnt let you use a specific library, and googling your issue recommends that specific library. You use something else, it works alright. Months later you re-write everything anyway.

rounce 8y ago
> However, the moment you dip into libraries you are dependent on someone else's work. Like every other programming language? > Then you run into a problem because Native doesnt let you use a specific library You are confusing runtime and language.
- dave84 8y ago
  >> However, the moment you dip into libraries you are dependent on someone else's work. >Like every other programming language? The lack of a standard library means you'll be dipping in a lot sooner.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - maemilius 8y ago
    I don't really get this. How is any language's stdlib _not_ someone else's work? The language itself is "someone else's work". The only difference, in my mind, between a "standard library" and a "third-party library" is the level of trust. If a third-party library is widely used by a community and known to be built by trustworthy people, I don't see how it's functionally different from a "standard" library. EDIT: To clarify, I'm only trying to make a general statement about libraries, not the trustworthiness of any particular language's library landscape.
- pmarreck 8y ago
  > Like every other programming language? There are languages which do a much better job of reducing or eliminating possible "blast radius" of a bug in a dependent library. Functional/immutable languages such as Elixir come to mind (for example, you can literally reduce the scope of a library to an individual function). This is not one of those languages.

rounce 8y ago

> However, the moment you dip into libraries you are dependent on someone else's work. Like every other programming language? > Then you run into a problem because Native doesnt let you use a specific library You are confusing runtime and language.

dave84 8y ago
>> However, the moment you dip into libraries you are dependent on someone else's work. >Like every other programming language? The lack of a standard library means you'll be dipping in a lot sooner.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- maemilius 8y ago
  I don't really get this. How is any language's stdlib _not_ someone else's work? The language itself is "someone else's work". The only difference, in my mind, between a "standard library" and a "third-party library" is the level of trust. If a third-party library is widely used by a community and known to be built by trustworthy people, I don't see how it's functionally different from a "standard" library. EDIT: To clarify, I'm only trying to make a general statement about libraries, not the trustworthiness of any particular language's library landscape.
pmarreck 8y ago
> Like every other programming language? There are languages which do a much better job of reducing or eliminating possible "blast radius" of a bug in a dependent library. Functional/immutable languages such as Elixir come to mind (for example, you can literally reduce the scope of a library to an individual function). This is not one of those languages.