3 ms·

Thanks for this, I liked it. I’d recommend anyone who’s posted for/against some web practice to read it. Maybe one day we could all collectively acknowledge t

by vosper 4y ago

Thanks for this, I liked it. I’d recommend anyone who’s posted for/against some web practice to read it. Maybe one day we could all collectively acknowledge that people work on different stuff, with different goals and under different constraints, and there isn’t actually one right way to build for the web. It’s such a tiresome part of HN.

dylan604 4y ago
Yes, just like _____ written in [Go|Rust|flavoflav]. However, at the beginning of every project, this conversation should be had. What are the needs of the project, what gets us there fast while still allowing to grow after scopecreep, what is going to allow for maintanence and future needs? Picking the latest tech just because it's a new project and you want to use the NEW on it just for the sake of it will probably mean finding yourself painted in a corner in the future (or maybe not the original dev, but those that are forced to follow).
- vosper 4y ago
  Of course, a discussion should be had, choices should be weighed. But since you mentioned “new just for the sake of it” I’ll mention that I think that’s overplayed, too. If you picked React when it was new, or GraphQL, or NextJS, then you probably made a pretty good choice. Backbone was the first of the modern MVC frameworks to get traction (someone will correct me on this) and if you’d chosen that when it was new it would also have been a pretty good decision. Kafka’s still around and going strong, wouldn’t have been a bad choice early-on.
  - lazide 4y ago
    It’s risk/reward trade offs. If you can afford high risk (React at the beginning?) and it works, you’re in a sweet spot for a long time. Most of them don’t pay out though, and most JS frameworks that got started around that time died long ago.
sodapopcan 4y ago
I don't believe that (all of) the people who get frustrated by these things don't understand that different problems require different solutions, it's when the majority of the industry (or more likely an influential minority) starts to say, "Hey! Let's build EVERYTHING this way" that that people start to complain. And I say this is warranted as it affects the job market. SPAs have their place (highly interactive applications that more closely mirror traditional desktops apps, I would say, the main one) but so many companies out there are developing their apps as SPAs that have no business being such and some of us would rather not have to deal with that (I've experienced this first hand). The other side (or one other side) of the coin, of course, is that our industry is super new and we're all still figuring it out. I always liken out industry to thinking about how long it took to standardize the hammer design we have to day. I don't have the exact stats, but I'm thinking it was probably 100s of years and our ancestors had many a fight over a big rock vs a plank with a bit small bit of steel on the end of it being the better choice.

by vosper 4y ago

dylan604 4y ago

Yes, just like _____ written in [Go|Rust|flavoflav]. However, at the beginning of every project, this conversation should be had. What are the needs of the project, what gets us there fast while still allowing to grow after scopecreep, what is going to allow for maintanence and future needs? Picking the latest tech just because it's a new project and you want to use the NEW on it just for the sake of it will probably mean finding yourself painted in a corner in the future (or maybe not the original dev, but those that are forced to follow).

vosper 4y ago
Of course, a discussion should be had, choices should be weighed. But since you mentioned “new just for the sake of it” I’ll mention that I think that’s overplayed, too. If you picked React when it was new, or GraphQL, or NextJS, then you probably made a pretty good choice. Backbone was the first of the modern MVC frameworks to get traction (someone will correct me on this) and if you’d chosen that when it was new it would also have been a pretty good decision. Kafka’s still around and going strong, wouldn’t have been a bad choice early-on.
- lazide 4y ago
  It’s risk/reward trade offs. If you can afford high risk (React at the beginning?) and it works, you’re in a sweet spot for a long time. Most of them don’t pay out though, and most JS frameworks that got started around that time died long ago.

sodapopcan 4y ago

I don't believe that (all of) the people who get frustrated by these things don't understand that different problems require different solutions, it's when the majority of the industry (or more likely an influential minority) starts to say, "Hey! Let's build EVERYTHING this way" that that people start to complain. And I say this is warranted as it affects the job market. SPAs have their place (highly interactive applications that more closely mirror traditional desktops apps, I would say, the main one) but so many companies out there are developing their apps as SPAs that have no business being such and some of us would rather not have to deal with that (I've experienced this first hand). The other side (or one other side) of the coin, of course, is that our industry is super new and we're all still figuring it out. I always liken out industry to thinking about how long it took to standardize the hammer design we have to day. I don't have the exact stats, but I'm thinking it was probably 100s of years and our ancestors had many a fight over a big rock vs a plank with a bit small bit of steel on the end of it being the better choice.