4 ms·

My point is, one need not apply an adjective to something that does not need qualifying. Just like "vanilla" JavaScript. You are either using JavaScript or you'

My point is, one need not apply an adjective to something that does not need qualifying. Just like "vanilla" JavaScript. You are either using JavaScript or you're not but people have been doing that for years and now I see posts asking for definitions or differences between "vanilla" and other flavors of js. Terminology is important but I see it's not important among some people and other hobbyists online.

goddtriffin 7y ago
I can't speak for the others, but when I use the terms 'vanilla JavaScript' and 'vanilla CSS', the distinction I'm trying to make is that I'm not using any libraries or frameworks. There is a meme within the community about 'vanilla JavaScript' called VanillaJS: http://vanilla-js.com/ http://vanilla-js.com/ https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20435653/what-is-vanillajs https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20435653/what-is-vanilla...
- sureaboutthis 7y ago
  Saying I'm using JavaScript is sufficient. Or stating "I'm not using any libraries or frameworks" works, too.
  - mercer 7y ago
    This is a weird thing to argue about. The overwhelming majority of front-end projects and developers that I encounter use some kind of library, framework, or compilation/build tool. It's common enough to basically be the default. If you use 'plain' or 'vanilla' javascript (or CSS), you're doing something less common, at the very least around these parts, and so qualifying this makes sense. The mere fact that many people clearly seem to feel a need to point this out makes it so. Why would they otherwise? Judging by your comment history, the vast majority of your contributions here boil down to some kind of dig at how 'people these days' are 'doing it wrong', and how obviously you are superior to that and how you don't see the need for any of this new-fangled stuff. I'm honestly curious whether that's just role-playing, or if that kind of superiority about being older and wiser is somehow important to you. I'd very much prefer it if you shared the wisdom you've accrued in a more constructive way, because as far as I can tell you're not actually wrong about a lot of this stuff. Older and wiser curmudgeons have played a valuable role in my development, but your approach strikes me as self-serving and somewhat poisonous to the/any community. But of course you're free to do as you please.
  - jcr1488 7y ago
    Are you always this cripplingly autistic?
rhizome 7y ago
I don't care if you didn't need it, because it's helpful for clarity regardless. https://stackoverflow.com/a/40115909/135845 https://stackoverflow.com/a/40115909/135845 Unfortunately, I see that "The Ubuntu Web Team" decided to shit the bed and steal the name for the CSS framework they created. So fsck me I guess.

goddtriffin 7y ago

I can't speak for the others, but when I use the terms 'vanilla JavaScript' and 'vanilla CSS', the distinction I'm trying to make is that I'm not using any libraries or frameworks. There is a meme within the community about 'vanilla JavaScript' called VanillaJS: http://vanilla-js.com/ http://vanilla-js.com/ https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20435653/what-is-vanillajs https://stackoverflow.com/questions/20435653/what-is-vanilla...

sureaboutthis 7y ago
Saying I'm using JavaScript is sufficient. Or stating "I'm not using any libraries or frameworks" works, too.
- mercer 7y ago
  This is a weird thing to argue about. The overwhelming majority of front-end projects and developers that I encounter use some kind of library, framework, or compilation/build tool. It's common enough to basically be the default. If you use 'plain' or 'vanilla' javascript (or CSS), you're doing something less common, at the very least around these parts, and so qualifying this makes sense. The mere fact that many people clearly seem to feel a need to point this out makes it so. Why would they otherwise? Judging by your comment history, the vast majority of your contributions here boil down to some kind of dig at how 'people these days' are 'doing it wrong', and how obviously you are superior to that and how you don't see the need for any of this new-fangled stuff. I'm honestly curious whether that's just role-playing, or if that kind of superiority about being older and wiser is somehow important to you. I'd very much prefer it if you shared the wisdom you've accrued in a more constructive way, because as far as I can tell you're not actually wrong about a lot of this stuff. Older and wiser curmudgeons have played a valuable role in my development, but your approach strikes me as self-serving and somewhat poisonous to the/any community. But of course you're free to do as you please.
- jcr1488 7y ago
  Are you always this cripplingly autistic?

rhizome 7y ago

I don't care if you didn't need it, because it's helpful for clarity regardless. https://stackoverflow.com/a/40115909/135845 https://stackoverflow.com/a/40115909/135845 Unfortunately, I see that "The Ubuntu Web Team" decided to shit the bed and steal the name for the CSS framework they created. So fsck me I guess.