> The usual "isomorphic" case for backend.js is no less 'presumptuous' or 'dismissive' than the comment you're pointing to and criticizing here > You can even

> The usual "isomorphic" case for backend.js is no less 'presumptuous' or 'dismissive' than the comment you're pointing to and criticizing here > You can even compile backend-friendly code to run in JS on the frontend, via emscripten (and increasingly, Wasm) Lol, you can't be serious