3 ms·

I don’t understand what line of thinking leads to such a ludicrous claim. It’s not just this article, there is a push for “vanila js” and “use the platform” in

by nsonha 5y ago

I don’t understand what line of thinking leads to such a ludicrous claim. It’s not just this article, there is a push for “vanila js” and “use the platform” in the community. I’d like to point out that frameworks exist in languages more mature and complex than ES6. So I don’t know what it is that javascript people think only they can see and everyone else doesn’t, after only 5 years or so of having a barely usable programming language.

mypastself 5y ago
Well, I think the “line of thinking” against frameworks and framework-y libraries is presented fairly well in the article: bloat, performance issues, debugging difficulties, steep learning curve, niche use, deprecation, and maintainability. You may disagree with one or more of those points, but I don’t think you’ve offered a strong rebuttal.
- nsonha 5y ago
  My question is rhetorical, and I did not bother to read the article, for that I am a javascript developer myself, and too familiar with these arguments. The only real valid point is bloat, simply because the web is the only platform that still has a code size requirement of applications from the 80s. It's not that there is no solution for it. Take for example island architecture, there is no such thing in "the platform". So if you do care about bloat and want to load only part of the app that's used, you would use a library, or framework, whatever you call it to help implement that. "write more compact code" or "avoid writing code" sounds like giving up to arbitrary restrictions to me. Performance isssues are mostly caused by incompetece, using frameworks or otherwise. The rest of the issues can be attributed to anything, and is subjected to improvements, rather than to be seen as reasons to dismiss the whole idea of frameworks. I'd like to point out another thing, all the tiny, low quality, "unixy" garbage on npm actually exists because of the dogmatic avoidance of frameworks.
Jenk 5y ago
It's insane, isn't it? Can you imagine someone claiming it's wrong to use a framework like ASP.NET or Entity Framework instead of "vanilla dotnet"? Or that it's wrong to use Laravel instead of "vanilla PHP"? Or Spring instead of "vanilla Java"?
rado 5y ago
Maybe they can see the unnecessarily huge size of these frameworks. Or the poor fit of foreign work/code organisation.
- have_faith 5y ago
  That's a critisim of specific frameworks, not frameworks as a whole. Many frameworks are tiny (Preact, Svelte, Solid, etc). Not sure what you mean about foreign work exactly.

by nsonha 5y ago

mypastself 5y ago

Well, I think the “line of thinking” against frameworks and framework-y libraries is presented fairly well in the article: bloat, performance issues, debugging difficulties, steep learning curve, niche use, deprecation, and maintainability. You may disagree with one or more of those points, but I don’t think you’ve offered a strong rebuttal.

nsonha 5y ago
My question is rhetorical, and I did not bother to read the article, for that I am a javascript developer myself, and too familiar with these arguments. The only real valid point is bloat, simply because the web is the only platform that still has a code size requirement of applications from the 80s. It's not that there is no solution for it. Take for example island architecture, there is no such thing in "the platform". So if you do care about bloat and want to load only part of the app that's used, you would use a library, or framework, whatever you call it to help implement that. "write more compact code" or "avoid writing code" sounds like giving up to arbitrary restrictions to me. Performance isssues are mostly caused by incompetece, using frameworks or otherwise. The rest of the issues can be attributed to anything, and is subjected to improvements, rather than to be seen as reasons to dismiss the whole idea of frameworks. I'd like to point out another thing, all the tiny, low quality, "unixy" garbage on npm actually exists because of the dogmatic avoidance of frameworks.

Jenk 5y ago

It's insane, isn't it? Can you imagine someone claiming it's wrong to use a framework like ASP.NET or Entity Framework instead of "vanilla dotnet"? Or that it's wrong to use Laravel instead of "vanilla PHP"? Or Spring instead of "vanilla Java"?

rado 5y ago

Maybe they can see the unnecessarily huge size of these frameworks. Or the poor fit of foreign work/code organisation.

have_faith 5y ago
That's a critisim of specific frameworks, not frameworks as a whole. Many frameworks are tiny (Preact, Svelte, Solid, etc). Not sure what you mean about foreign work exactly.