5 ms·

I've read it, just another piece with zero substance. So what's the author's point, why is Javascript bad according to him? - because there is no standard libr

by vfc1 7y ago

I've read it, just another piece with zero substance. So what's the author's point, why is Javascript bad according to him? - because there is no standard library and a lot of things are left to userland - because Axios error handling is less than ideal - because bugs sit long time in public repos unanswered - because some of the language unusual expression parsing quirk, that I've yet to find in a real program - because projects like Webpack have tons of funding via open collective, while other important libraries are done on a voluntary basis I couldn't have put together a more random set of unrelated and largely irrelevant complaints if I tried to.

randomdudeonhn 7y ago
I've tried to explain my point and provide some examples of how the problem manifests in the ecosystem of the language. While my writing skills may need work, I would not call the post random.
- vfc1 7y ago
  The stuff you pointed out could be said of any language, any ecosystem, couldn't it? There is always some library that is not that well designed that got more popular than it should, little response from certain Github repos, some less than ideal language feature that is there due to historical reasons, important code maintained on a voluntary basis. Tell me an ecosystem that does not suffer from any of these problems, and I will show you a language that hardly no one uses (when compared to Javascript). This stuff is inevitable, it comes with the years, due to backwards compatibility, stuff piles up over time. Javascript has resisted particularly well. If you don't like Javascript, switch to Typescript for me it's the enterprise language of the future, for doing both backend and frontend development.
  - randomdudeonhn 7y ago
    I won't start even bigger shitstorm by naming better languages in my opinion. Suffice to say I've never had problems sending headers or getting HTTP status code in any major language, except JS(examples are linked in the post).
    - notyourday 7y ago
      I have never had a problem sending headers or getting http status code in JS. requite('http') is your friend in node. XMLHttpRequest is your friend in VanilaJS. Your beef seems to be with a pile of convenience code added by some other projects.
- chosenbreed37 7y ago
  > I've tried to explain my point and provide some examples of how the problem manifests in the ecosystem of the language. While my writing skills may need work, I would not call the post random. True. I wouldn't say it is random. It was an interesting read. I do find it interesting that the title is "Javascript is Bad" as opposed to say "Here are some warts you can find in Javascript". My take is that it can't really be entirely bad. If it is then it doesn't really seem to matter. For various reasons (some probably down to chance) JS + HTML + CSS underpin the web in spite of their faults. What that suggests to me is that JS must have some properties that have enabled to dominate the web up to now. I wonder if in reality what matters most is the user experiences delivered to users and the value that derived by the individuals/companies that produce them. In addition the ease with which new devs can get started with the language seems like a big plus. With that mind, in some ways it's possibly irrelevant how nasty the code looks, how many iterations it took to weed out bugs due to the warts, packaging, etc
notus 7y ago
Typical disconnected comments from the author about JS as usual. Why would they focus on axios error handling and not fetch? Even dredging up some left pad.... People complain about standard libraries in languages that have them. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Let's just chalk it up to a different way of doing things. I personally don't mind leveraging NPM for packages I need. I make use of utility libraries like lodash-fp or ramda to provide the functionality I want. Bugs actually have a pretty decent amount of resolution for popular JS libraries. I think this is true for all languages though. Popular libraries get worked on, unpopular ones don't. Cherry picking bugs that the author thinks should be easy to fix isn't doing any service to anyone. Everyone who has worked on a product intended for longevity knows there are a ton of easy bugs that never get fixed because of something called.... priorities.

by vfc1 7y ago

randomdudeonhn 7y ago

I've tried to explain my point and provide some examples of how the problem manifests in the ecosystem of the language. While my writing skills may need work, I would not call the post random.

vfc1 7y ago
The stuff you pointed out could be said of any language, any ecosystem, couldn't it? There is always some library that is not that well designed that got more popular than it should, little response from certain Github repos, some less than ideal language feature that is there due to historical reasons, important code maintained on a voluntary basis. Tell me an ecosystem that does not suffer from any of these problems, and I will show you a language that hardly no one uses (when compared to Javascript). This stuff is inevitable, it comes with the years, due to backwards compatibility, stuff piles up over time. Javascript has resisted particularly well. If you don't like Javascript, switch to Typescript for me it's the enterprise language of the future, for doing both backend and frontend development.
- randomdudeonhn 7y ago
  I won't start even bigger shitstorm by naming better languages in my opinion. Suffice to say I've never had problems sending headers or getting HTTP status code in any major language, except JS(examples are linked in the post).
  - notyourday 7y ago
    I have never had a problem sending headers or getting http status code in JS. requite('http') is your friend in node. XMLHttpRequest is your friend in VanilaJS. Your beef seems to be with a pile of convenience code added by some other projects.
chosenbreed37 7y ago
> I've tried to explain my point and provide some examples of how the problem manifests in the ecosystem of the language. While my writing skills may need work, I would not call the post random. True. I wouldn't say it is random. It was an interesting read. I do find it interesting that the title is "Javascript is Bad" as opposed to say "Here are some warts you can find in Javascript". My take is that it can't really be entirely bad. If it is then it doesn't really seem to matter. For various reasons (some probably down to chance) JS + HTML + CSS underpin the web in spite of their faults. What that suggests to me is that JS must have some properties that have enabled to dominate the web up to now. I wonder if in reality what matters most is the user experiences delivered to users and the value that derived by the individuals/companies that produce them. In addition the ease with which new devs can get started with the language seems like a big plus. With that mind, in some ways it's possibly irrelevant how nasty the code looks, how many iterations it took to weed out bugs due to the warts, packaging, etc

notus 7y ago

Typical disconnected comments from the author about JS as usual. Why would they focus on axios error handling and not fetch? Even dredging up some left pad.... People complain about standard libraries in languages that have them. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Let's just chalk it up to a different way of doing things. I personally don't mind leveraging NPM for packages I need. I make use of utility libraries like lodash-fp or ramda to provide the functionality I want. Bugs actually have a pretty decent amount of resolution for popular JS libraries. I think this is true for all languages though. Popular libraries get worked on, unpopular ones don't. Cherry picking bugs that the author thinks should be easy to fix isn't doing any service to anyone. Everyone who has worked on a product intended for longevity knows there are a ton of easy bugs that never get fixed because of something called.... priorities.