This is why I was reluctant to give examples (because as soon I did, someone was bound to say something along the lines of "well these leverage react in a very

This is why I was reluctant to give examples (because as soon I did, someone was bound to say something along the lines of "well these leverage react in a very react specific way so of course it makes sense they're react things") The thing is that we could s/react/jquery/ and end up with a more-or-less believable argument for why "jquery is needed for complex apps": You can't just `draggable=true`. jQuery wants you to describe your UI in terms of a plugin's options object rather than doing raw DOM manipulation; libraries like jquery-ui do the work to tie together drag events with underlying logic (e.g. snap) to drive jQuery re-rendering. You're not "using other libraries to do DOM manipulation"; jQuery's doing the work. Etc. Of course a library on top of react/jquery/whatever will generally be written in a way that is idiomatic for code written on top of its respective base framework. For library writers like you and me, it might even make sense to argue that React rendering model is nicer for writing libraries on top of than jQuery. But that's a developer-oriented mindset, which, as the_gastropod had alluded to, it's very often at odds w/ a user-oriented mindset. The "old beard" approach slices through all the abstraction layers and simply points out: huh, you don't need context and css-in-js and themes to do dark mode, plain CSS fits the bill. And when one resets assumptions enough times and start noticing more often than not that "complex" projects turn out to be glorified CRUD apps, one might indeed start to wonder if the abstractions are really as fitting for the task at hand as they should be.