5 ms·

It seems like a lot of websites could replace react/angular/framework with some simple jquery and html but that's not cool and not good on your resume. So now w

It seems like a lot of websites could replace react/angular/framework with some simple jquery and html but that's not cool and not good on your resume. So now we have ui frameworks, custom css engines with a server side build pipeline deploying to docker just for a photo gallery.

azangru 6y ago
> with some simple jquery Plain javascript, if you want to go down that route. Jquery is around 30kb of javascript, if I remember correctly. > but that's not cool and not good on your resume On the contrary, writing vanilla js is pretty cool and impressive on the resume, when every other developer puts react there; but it's pretty miserable too, compared to using frameworks.
- bob1029 6y ago
  If I see the words "vanilla JS" or "SQLite" on a resume, I will automatically place it into my maybe pile.
  - ant6n 6y ago
    Is that a good or bad thing?
    - bob1029 6y ago
      Yes, its basically a shortcut when I am doing a quick first scan through resumes. The moment I see one of those keywords I will flag it for 2nd pass review and move on.
      - asddubs 6y ago
        I'll bring some demos of my snowflake animations and cartoon character gifs that follow the cursor around to the interview I actually quite like writing vanilla js in my spare time, but I can never tell if I'm doing everything horribly wrong or not
        bob1029 6y ago
        As long as it makes sense when you read it after a few days (i.e. its well organized) and it also works as expected, then you are probably doing well. Javascript is actually incredibly fast on most devices, especially if you are constraining yourself to the vanilla API and not something like jQuery. Remember, every web browser's JS engine has been hyper-optimized to support decades of half-assed website implementations. It's really hard to screw up perf on document.getElementById(). There's honestly not a whole lot of ways to hang yourself with the vanilla methods unless you are trying to build something ridiculous like a raytracer or physics engine.
        azangru 6y ago
        > document.getElementById() Can we at least do document.querySelector? Pretty please? :-)
        snet0 6y ago
        Just use the 1 line jQuery: const $ = document.querySelector.bind(document)
        abhishekjha 6y ago
        What does it do?
        asddubs 6y ago
        i think the biggest thing for your average app is just causing a lot of layout repaints. as long as you spam requestanimationframe everywhere and group style changes and polling, you'll be good. I was really surprised how good I was able to get things on even an ancient ipad 2 I had laying around
- aryonoco 6y ago
  Vanilla JS is pretty cool. Eleventy is even cooler, it gets you most of the things a framework gets you, but gets compiled to fast, vanilla JS and that's what served to the browser. Svelte/Sapper also has a lot of potential as it only ships the parts if the framework that are absolutely needed instead of the whole thing. But in reality, you can make plenty of very fast React sites and plenty of slow vanilla JS sites.
  - j-krieger 6y ago
    Any modern JS Framework gets compiled to vanilla JS. That‘s exactly the problem: Because Browsers don‘t implement ES6+ Syntax natively, it has to get compiled to complicated, long winded ES5 or filled by heavy polyfills. If browsers were all spec compliant, code bundles would be way smaller.
    - azangru 6y ago
      > Because Browsers don‘t implement ES6+ Syntax natively Erm what? What browsers are you talking about now?
      - IggleSniggle 6y ago
        This almost certainly means Internet Explorer, if they’re only referring to ES6. But honestly I love all the feature since then. It’s actually difficult for me to imagine not using TypeScript these days, let alone not having access to asynchronous/await or async iterables, plus all the tiny little syntax improvements it’s easy to take for granted like Array.includes()
      - duckmysick 6y ago
        Old Android browsers, UC Browser.
- wnevets 6y ago
  Feel free to replace jQuery with regular JavaScript in my post.
tester756 6y ago
Why would you want to replace something like Vue with jQuery? Just because jQuery isn't "brand, new frontend framework" doesn't mean it is good or something From my experience jQuery leads to difficult to maintain codebases relatively fast in compare to e.g Vue.
- simple_phrases 6y ago
  Because to some people, programming in strings with Vue is unpleasant.
  - jozzy-james 6y ago
    huh?
- tomc1985 6y ago
  Difficult to a newskool kiddos fresh out of bootcamp that can't wrap their heads around complexity, maybe. In my experience it's the frontend frameworks that make for worse code. Callback soup is downright simple and easy-to-follow compared to some of the atrocities that React et al have wrought. Worse, they repackage old tech as "new" while completely reworking the vocabulary and paradigms, so old hats have to relearn shit they already know because some snot-nosed Facebook engineer needs another resume badge for his inevitable 18-month departure
munk-a 6y ago
It's trendy to take a shot at new things. You need to build a solution to the problem - sometimes HTML can get this done and sometimes it can't. I agree that we've gone off the deep end of "everything must be react" but it's silly to say this is simply to drive resumes. It's mostly under-experienced folks using react as their hammer to deal with any nail, screw or bolt they come across - but that hammer is useful and when you've got a nail you should use it.

azangru 6y ago

> with some simple jquery Plain javascript, if you want to go down that route. Jquery is around 30kb of javascript, if I remember correctly. > but that's not cool and not good on your resume On the contrary, writing vanilla js is pretty cool and impressive on the resume, when every other developer puts react there; but it's pretty miserable too, compared to using frameworks.

bob1029 6y ago
If I see the words "vanilla JS" or "SQLite" on a resume, I will automatically place it into my maybe pile.
- ant6n 6y ago
  Is that a good or bad thing?
  - bob1029 6y ago
    Yes, its basically a shortcut when I am doing a quick first scan through resumes. The moment I see one of those keywords I will flag it for 2nd pass review and move on.
    - asddubs 6y ago
      I'll bring some demos of my snowflake animations and cartoon character gifs that follow the cursor around to the interview I actually quite like writing vanilla js in my spare time, but I can never tell if I'm doing everything horribly wrong or not
      - bob1029 6y ago
        As long as it makes sense when you read it after a few days (i.e. its well organized) and it also works as expected, then you are probably doing well. Javascript is actually incredibly fast on most devices, especially if you are constraining yourself to the vanilla API and not something like jQuery. Remember, every web browser's JS engine has been hyper-optimized to support decades of half-assed website implementations. It's really hard to screw up perf on document.getElementById(). There's honestly not a whole lot of ways to hang yourself with the vanilla methods unless you are trying to build something ridiculous like a raytracer or physics engine.
        azangru 6y ago
        > document.getElementById() Can we at least do document.querySelector? Pretty please? :-)
        snet0 6y ago
        Just use the 1 line jQuery: const $ = document.querySelector.bind(document)
        abhishekjha 6y ago
        What does it do?
        asddubs 6y ago
        i think the biggest thing for your average app is just causing a lot of layout repaints. as long as you spam requestanimationframe everywhere and group style changes and polling, you'll be good. I was really surprised how good I was able to get things on even an ancient ipad 2 I had laying around
aryonoco 6y ago
Vanilla JS is pretty cool. Eleventy is even cooler, it gets you most of the things a framework gets you, but gets compiled to fast, vanilla JS and that's what served to the browser. Svelte/Sapper also has a lot of potential as it only ships the parts if the framework that are absolutely needed instead of the whole thing. But in reality, you can make plenty of very fast React sites and plenty of slow vanilla JS sites.
- j-krieger 6y ago
  Any modern JS Framework gets compiled to vanilla JS. That‘s exactly the problem: Because Browsers don‘t implement ES6+ Syntax natively, it has to get compiled to complicated, long winded ES5 or filled by heavy polyfills. If browsers were all spec compliant, code bundles would be way smaller.
  - azangru 6y ago
    > Because Browsers don‘t implement ES6+ Syntax natively Erm what? What browsers are you talking about now?
    - IggleSniggle 6y ago
      This almost certainly means Internet Explorer, if they’re only referring to ES6. But honestly I love all the feature since then. It’s actually difficult for me to imagine not using TypeScript these days, let alone not having access to asynchronous/await or async iterables, plus all the tiny little syntax improvements it’s easy to take for granted like Array.includes()
    - duckmysick 6y ago
      Old Android browsers, UC Browser.
wnevets 6y ago
Feel free to replace jQuery with regular JavaScript in my post.

tester756 6y ago

Why would you want to replace something like Vue with jQuery? Just because jQuery isn't "brand, new frontend framework" doesn't mean it is good or something From my experience jQuery leads to difficult to maintain codebases relatively fast in compare to e.g Vue.

simple_phrases 6y ago
Because to some people, programming in strings with Vue is unpleasant.
- jozzy-james 6y ago
  huh?
tomc1985 6y ago
Difficult to a newskool kiddos fresh out of bootcamp that can't wrap their heads around complexity, maybe. In my experience it's the frontend frameworks that make for worse code. Callback soup is downright simple and easy-to-follow compared to some of the atrocities that React et al have wrought. Worse, they repackage old tech as "new" while completely reworking the vocabulary and paradigms, so old hats have to relearn shit they already know because some snot-nosed Facebook engineer needs another resume badge for his inevitable 18-month departure

munk-a 6y ago

It's trendy to take a shot at new things. You need to build a solution to the problem - sometimes HTML can get this done and sometimes it can't. I agree that we've gone off the deep end of "everything must be react" but it's silly to say this is simply to drive resumes. It's mostly under-experienced folks using react as their hammer to deal with any nail, screw or bolt they come across - but that hammer is useful and when you've got a nail you should use it.