3 ms·
The only two that I'd put on the same level are jQuery and React. And people are still happily using jQuery to this day (maybe happy is the wrong word). So I do
by xmprt 6y ago
The only two that I'd put on the same level are jQuery and React. And people are still happily using jQuery to this day (maybe happy is the wrong word). So I don't think React is going anywhere for a long time but if something better comes out then why is that a bad thing?
- ogre_codes 6y agoIt is more about the relative instability of Javascript as a platform versus nearly any other platform out there. Skills I learned in college about writing SQL are still relevant today, several decades later. Skills I learned coding for iOS (even Swift!) years ago are still relevant today. CSS and HTML skills I learned decades ago are still relevant, etc etc. Python/ Django knowledge from 10 years ago is still largely relevant. React/ jQuery/ EmberJS/ Vue/ Angular/ Grunt/ Gulp/ Webpack/ Underscore/ CoffeeScript/ etc... damned near every Javascript library I've ever worked on has an extremely limited lifespan in terms of relevance. Even within React, it's hard to keep relevant. Class based React? We're doing Hooks now! > why is that a bad thing? It's only bad if you have to try and maintain 10 year old Javascript and in order to do it, you have to learn a whole new paradigm. IMO it's doubly bad right now since so many people are abandoning semantic HTML and more or less rolling everything as their own custom components.
- Semiapies 6y agoNot exactly the case for protects like Crank built in the JSX "paradigm".