6 ms·

I'm just so burnt out with new things. How do I combat such burnout? I really don't care about 'Htmx', I think barely any apps need much beyond what was availab

I'm just so burnt out with new things. How do I combat such burnout? I really don't care about 'Htmx', I think barely any apps need much beyond what was available in ~2006 in terms of web tech. I just feel tired knowing that moving from React to Htmx is an option. Yet another option which will very possibly bring zero commercial value (although it might be a nicer dev experience I guess) to any project I ever work on. Am I wrong?

__s 4y ago
You can get by mostly ignoring the churn. I still haven't switched to hooks with React; I'll figure it out when I run into a codebase using them
recursivedoubts 4y ago
That's understandable, the front end world is extremely churny. If you don't want to deep dive on htmx-as-a-tool due to burn out, I completely understand. But, at some point, it might make sense to read up on the philosophy behind it (hypermedia as an archiecture) because that is an area where it is different than most front end frameworks today. I have a collection of essays here: https://htmx.org/essays https://htmx.org/essays
- bigDinosaur 4y ago
  Thanks, I'll definitely take a look given your (and others') replies here.
29athrowaway 4y ago
Unless you need to hire. Then 2006 tech is not viable. 2006 tech in frontend = COBOL level stuff
- nabaraz 4y ago
  This is not a correct interpretation. I'd argue the basics - HTML, CSS and Javascript hasn't changed as much since 2006. jQuery came out in 2006 and we were manipulating DOM back then. Now, we have frameworks like React, where we are manipulating DOM. The only differences are new browser APIs and a much better code maintainability.
throwaway0asd 4y ago
> How do I combat such burnout? What works for me: don't waste time with frameworks. The web standards are simple to learn and are also wonderfully not opinionated.
- doctor_eval 4y ago
  I dunno, I took this advice and ended up rolling my own thing that looked an awful lot like a framework, but wasn’t as good because the framework authors are better at JS than I am. I’ve landed on Svelte+Typescript lately, and It’s Really Doing It For Me (tm). I think the trick is to find a framework or library that gets you, and just run with it.
  - throwaway0asd 4y ago
    Not using frameworks means more than the tools you pick (or make).
easrng 4y ago
HTMX is much closer to 2006 web than React.
- recursivedoubts 4y ago
  that's very true, it's an extension of HTML as a hypermedia, and you can achieve useful patterns with as few as one or two additional attributes (that are extremely symmetric with "normal" HTML). a good example is lazy loading: https://htmx.org/examples/lazy-load/ https://htmx.org/examples/lazy-load/ two plain HTML attributes that give you a nice tool for deferring expensive calculations so that users can get to interactive more quickly with the rest of the page
r3trohack3r 4y ago
For me, this feeling came from trying to stay on top of all the innovation happening out at the edge of problem domains. The thing is, none of those problems at the edges applied to me. I was chasing them for the sake of chasing them. Once I stopped chasing the outer edge of what everyone else was trying to solve, and instead focused on the problem directly in front of me, the anxiety of being on the technical treadmill went away. When I have a problem to solve, I research it. As the outer edges get figured out, they start forming boring tech. I try to keep things boring when doing research - and avoid running up the treadmill unless necessary.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
toddmorey 4y ago
Well in this particular instance, their codebase size was reduced 67% and JS dependencies went down from 255 to 9 with TTI cut in half. I'm not one to always chase the new shiny, but that's interesting enough to explore & I think does bring commercial value. Last note: HTMX really feels much more like 2006-style web tech in philosophy which is a refreshing counter to all the current js complexity.
austhrow743 4y ago
Don't look at it. There's a million new things being invented and ignored every day but for some reason if it touches web dev it 1) gets a thread 2) gets upvoted and 3) you people are near the top of every comment thread. Whatever led to you posting that you don't care about this rather than just not even noticing it like all the new things you see every single day that don't even penetrate your consciousness. Find and kill that.
- andrei_says_ 4y ago
  I really like this comment. Pointed my attention on how my mind anthromorphizes hacker news comments and perceived it as an amorphous invisible ultra smart conversation partner. I wish I could have a meat space equivalent for that but given the amount of possible topics it’s hard to imagine a human equivalent.
umvi 4y ago
Just use vanilla html/js/css. For most stuff that's fine. React is good for web applications that require reusable components and have a lot of state to manage, but if you are building a personal site just use vanilla.
- devoutsalsa 4y ago
  Vanilla JS definitely needs some discipline. I just made an app in vanilla JS for the first time in a while, and OMG it’s a rat’s nest XD
  - duxup 4y ago
    I’m a fan of building with vanilla JS and I agree 100%. It can be simpler, but it can get out of hand just as easily as any front end framework.
  - criddell 4y ago
    Have you ever tried writing a native client? I think the native client path is something that a lot of developers don't even consider these days. I think it's an area of great opportunity.
    - devoutsalsa 4y ago
      What do you mean? Like writing one's own framework, such as devoutsalsa.js?
      - criddell 4y ago
        I have no idea what that is, but since it's javascript I assume it's still running in the browser. I'm suggesting getting out of the browser all together and writing a native client. Before Evernote moved to Electron, it's what they did. Their Windows client was written in C++ and their Mac client was Objective C.
colordrops 4y ago
Just stick with web standards and life will be a lot simpler. All frameworks, including React, will eventually go by the wayside, but the standards will still be there. I've been building on standard Web Components exclusively since 2015 at multiple jobs and it has sustained a very successful career so far.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
aussiesnack 4y ago
Why not just limit your perusal of the new stuff? It's interesting enough if you're in the game to keep apprised, from a 10,000 ft pov, of what's around. A delimited once-a-day/week/whatever browse fulfils that. But stop there. Let all your further dives into new tech be driven purely by actual needs/uses (career or business or hobby etc). The solution to the Paradox of Choice is to opt out. Human minds aren't soul-stuff magic - they're evolved systems whose history hasn't equipped them to deal fluently with unlimited choices. That's just physical reality, so we need to comport with it, not with the blandishments of the virtual business/tech world. In many domains of contemporary life, one way to be free (and reduce anxiety) is to use volitional attention to restrict the range of choices we're presented with.
mclightning 4y ago
I am totally with you on this. I've been a React dev for 5 years. When they release new stuff (like hooks), I just wait until it becomes unavoidable, or I need to take interviews for a new job. I was hesitant to switch to Hooks, or Context. I only studied them when I was preparing for a new job and interviews for it. I still feel queasy when I encounter obscure Typescript features (e.g. Omit/Pick, Generic Type Templates <T>) used in a codebase. Frontend simply does not need this much complexity....But I just google and find out. I don't personally go out of my way to bring new features into my codebases. Perhaps, only time they become unavoidable is when you're interfacing with a library or building a library to be interfaced. I have done seriously complex computer vision stuff, 3D game development, embedded electronics. I have seen complex code where it had to be. People make frontend development more complicated than it needs to be most of the time. They just end up plastering everything with newest/coolest tech.

__s 4y ago

You can get by mostly ignoring the churn. I still haven't switched to hooks with React; I'll figure it out when I run into a codebase using them

recursivedoubts 4y ago

That's understandable, the front end world is extremely churny. If you don't want to deep dive on htmx-as-a-tool due to burn out, I completely understand. But, at some point, it might make sense to read up on the philosophy behind it (hypermedia as an archiecture) because that is an area where it is different than most front end frameworks today. I have a collection of essays here: https://htmx.org/essays https://htmx.org/essays

bigDinosaur 4y ago
Thanks, I'll definitely take a look given your (and others') replies here.

29athrowaway 4y ago

Unless you need to hire. Then 2006 tech is not viable. 2006 tech in frontend = COBOL level stuff

nabaraz 4y ago
This is not a correct interpretation. I'd argue the basics - HTML, CSS and Javascript hasn't changed as much since 2006. jQuery came out in 2006 and we were manipulating DOM back then. Now, we have frameworks like React, where we are manipulating DOM. The only differences are new browser APIs and a much better code maintainability.

throwaway0asd 4y ago

> How do I combat such burnout? What works for me: don't waste time with frameworks. The web standards are simple to learn and are also wonderfully not opinionated.

doctor_eval 4y ago
I dunno, I took this advice and ended up rolling my own thing that looked an awful lot like a framework, but wasn’t as good because the framework authors are better at JS than I am. I’ve landed on Svelte+Typescript lately, and It’s Really Doing It For Me (tm). I think the trick is to find a framework or library that gets you, and just run with it.
- throwaway0asd 4y ago
  Not using frameworks means more than the tools you pick (or make).

easrng 4y ago

HTMX is much closer to 2006 web than React.

recursivedoubts 4y ago
that's very true, it's an extension of HTML as a hypermedia, and you can achieve useful patterns with as few as one or two additional attributes (that are extremely symmetric with "normal" HTML). a good example is lazy loading: https://htmx.org/examples/lazy-load/ https://htmx.org/examples/lazy-load/ two plain HTML attributes that give you a nice tool for deferring expensive calculations so that users can get to interactive more quickly with the rest of the page

r3trohack3r 4y ago

For me, this feeling came from trying to stay on top of all the innovation happening out at the edge of problem domains. The thing is, none of those problems at the edges applied to me. I was chasing them for the sake of chasing them. Once I stopped chasing the outer edge of what everyone else was trying to solve, and instead focused on the problem directly in front of me, the anxiety of being on the technical treadmill went away. When I have a problem to solve, I research it. As the outer edges get figured out, they start forming boring tech. I try to keep things boring when doing research - and avoid running up the treadmill unless necessary.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

toddmorey 4y ago

Well in this particular instance, their codebase size was reduced 67% and JS dependencies went down from 255 to 9 with TTI cut in half. I'm not one to always chase the new shiny, but that's interesting enough to explore & I think does bring commercial value. Last note: HTMX really feels much more like 2006-style web tech in philosophy which is a refreshing counter to all the current js complexity.

austhrow743 4y ago

Don't look at it. There's a million new things being invented and ignored every day but for some reason if it touches web dev it 1) gets a thread 2) gets upvoted and 3) you people are near the top of every comment thread. Whatever led to you posting that you don't care about this rather than just not even noticing it like all the new things you see every single day that don't even penetrate your consciousness. Find and kill that.

andrei_says_ 4y ago
I really like this comment. Pointed my attention on how my mind anthromorphizes hacker news comments and perceived it as an amorphous invisible ultra smart conversation partner. I wish I could have a meat space equivalent for that but given the amount of possible topics it’s hard to imagine a human equivalent.

umvi 4y ago

Just use vanilla html/js/css. For most stuff that's fine. React is good for web applications that require reusable components and have a lot of state to manage, but if you are building a personal site just use vanilla.

devoutsalsa 4y ago
Vanilla JS definitely needs some discipline. I just made an app in vanilla JS for the first time in a while, and OMG it’s a rat’s nest XD
- duxup 4y ago
  I’m a fan of building with vanilla JS and I agree 100%. It can be simpler, but it can get out of hand just as easily as any front end framework.
- criddell 4y ago
  Have you ever tried writing a native client? I think the native client path is something that a lot of developers don't even consider these days. I think it's an area of great opportunity.
  - devoutsalsa 4y ago
    What do you mean? Like writing one's own framework, such as devoutsalsa.js?
    - criddell 4y ago
      I have no idea what that is, but since it's javascript I assume it's still running in the browser. I'm suggesting getting out of the browser all together and writing a native client. Before Evernote moved to Electron, it's what they did. Their Windows client was written in C++ and their Mac client was Objective C.

colordrops 4y ago

Just stick with web standards and life will be a lot simpler. All frameworks, including React, will eventually go by the wayside, but the standards will still be there. I've been building on standard Web Components exclusively since 2015 at multiple jobs and it has sustained a very successful career so far.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

aussiesnack 4y ago

Why not just limit your perusal of the new stuff? It's interesting enough if you're in the game to keep apprised, from a 10,000 ft pov, of what's around. A delimited once-a-day/week/whatever browse fulfils that. But stop there. Let all your further dives into new tech be driven purely by actual needs/uses (career or business or hobby etc). The solution to the Paradox of Choice is to opt out. Human minds aren't soul-stuff magic - they're evolved systems whose history hasn't equipped them to deal fluently with unlimited choices. That's just physical reality, so we need to comport with it, not with the blandishments of the virtual business/tech world. In many domains of contemporary life, one way to be free (and reduce anxiety) is to use volitional attention to restrict the range of choices we're presented with.

mclightning 4y ago

I am totally with you on this. I've been a React dev for 5 years. When they release new stuff (like hooks), I just wait until it becomes unavoidable, or I need to take interviews for a new job. I was hesitant to switch to Hooks, or Context. I only studied them when I was preparing for a new job and interviews for it. I still feel queasy when I encounter obscure Typescript features (e.g. Omit/Pick, Generic Type Templates <T>) used in a codebase. Frontend simply does not need this much complexity....But I just google and find out. I don't personally go out of my way to bring new features into my codebases. Perhaps, only time they become unavoidable is when you're interfacing with a library or building a library to be interfaced. I have done seriously complex computer vision stuff, 3D game development, embedded electronics. I have seen complex code where it had to be. People make frontend development more complicated than it needs to be most of the time. They just end up plastering everything with newest/coolest tech.