> If everyone is writing "raw" JS/HTML/SQL/Java/whatever, they are actually building their own individual, unstandardized frameworks. It depends. If you have

> If everyone is writing "raw" JS/HTML/SQL/Java/whatever, they are actually building their own individual, unstandardized frameworks. It depends. If you have a nail, and you are using a jackhammer of a framework to pound it in, every developer that comes after you has to learn how to use that jackhammer unless they have previous experience with it. And honestly, most complex frameworks have so many different potential usage patterns that future developers will still have a heck of a learning curve. (I've never seen two uses of redux that remotely resembled each other! After using redux for 3 years I can easily find redux code that I have literally next to no idea what it is doing!) If you use a hammer, even if it is a bespoke hammer, future developers just have to learn how to pick up that hammer. Obviously at some point it pays to switch to using an Industry Standard(tm) solution, but for many problems plain old JS or HTML may very well be appropriate. For example, I was making ad campaign landing pages for my now defunct startup. To ensure speed I wanted them to all be static HTML. I could have used a static site generator of some sort, configured templates and all that jazz, or, instead, I could just write HTML + CSS for 3 landing pages. (Actually I only had to write the CSS once). Now if I needed to programmatically generate dozens of landing pages, then sure, adopting some static site generating framework may have been worthwhile. But in my case it wasn't. Raw HTML was the correct solution.