5 ms·

This is an extremely cool project, but after browsing the source code a bit, it looks like it's badly in need of modernization. CSS is Bootstrap 3. The docs r

This is an extremely cool project, but after browsing the source code a bit, it looks like it's badly in need of modernization. CSS is Bootstrap 3. The docs reference Web Components, and I do see the use of customElements.define() so (I think?) it's using "real" Web Components technologies, but the code is indecipherable to me: var n = t.getAttribute('name') || ''; if (!n) return; var p = t.getAttribute(T_PATH) || 'null'; var c = t.getAttribute(T_CONFIG) || 'null'; var d = t.getAttribute(T_DEFAULT) || ''; var s = '__'; var meta = n + s + p + s + c + (d ? (s + d) : ''); t.$jcwebcomponent = true; compilecomponent(meta, t); Note, this isn't the minified version, it's straight from jc.js, not jc.min.js. Looking through it, most of the code is like this, and there's liberal use of "var". This isn't a cherrypicked example. It looks like it was originally written about six years ago, and I see active commits, so it's really confusing to me why the code base would be in such rough shape. The components implementation is very pythonic - it passes "self" around to decorate with functions, it doesn't look like it's been modernized to use classes. From a features standpoint, the project is very cool. My concern with choosing to use it in a production app is the enormous amount of very obvious technical debt that I'm seeing. At some point, this will either need a major overhaul and rewrite (an extraordinary effort for a project this size), a dual-implementation support (like react and a few others did, with class based and functional APIs both supported) and a long, slow reimplementation path, or a decay into obsolescence as the core frameworks becomes hopelessly outdated and difficult to maintain. That's a really difficult technical position to be in, and I sympathize with the challenge ahead. Clearly there are very talented developers working on this project, I'm looking forward to seeing how they solve these issues moving forward.

petersirka 4y ago
The code isn't terrible, but it's not clear to you because you don't have the necessary information. The Total.js UI library (jComponent) is now 50% backward compatible with the UI library that you opened in 2014! You must know that we want to keep long-term backward compatibility. It's not a 100% nice code and of course, we will release a new version v20 (of UI library) this or next year cleared from the older code. We must offer stable tools for development, and that's critical for us and our customers. This platform has been developed for around 10 years, and it isn't easy, but we will keep doing this since it is our hobby.
- claytongulick 4y ago
  I think the project is very cool, and I'm impressed with the amount of functionality it has. I do think there's a considerable burden of technical debt in the current code base right now that the company will need to develop a strategy to address, which is absolutely normal for a project of this scope and age. It's a tough challenge, one I've faced several times. Given the clear technical talent I see with the project, I have every confidence that it's a challenge that will be overcome, and I'm looking forward to watching the project and seeing how it progresses.
devrand 4y ago
Why can't code just be old? If it's stable, sustainable, and able to deliver on customer needs, then who cares? The only benefit at that point be to prevent people nitpicking that their code uses "var".
- claytongulick 4y ago
  In most cases, I'd agree with you - but I think this one is a little different since the customer is a technical implementer building a product. For some use cases, I think it would be fine - internal tools that need a quick and easy solution, perhaps. But I don't think anyone feels great about building a product on an aging foundation. Would you select Angular 1 as a UI framework for a new project today? Also, I think it's hard to make a good argument for single letter variable names, except in very rare cases. Unfortunately, in this code base their use is the norm rather than the exception.
bakugo 4y ago
> CSS is Bootstrap 3. > there's liberal use of "var" > The components implementation is very pythonic - it passes "self" around to decorate with functions Could you explain why these things are bad, other than "it's not the hip and trendy way to do things"?
- claytongulick 4y ago
  Sure. Using Bootstrap 3 is a problem because it hasn't been supported for over three years and is no longer actively maintained [1]. This is a problem for many reasons, security and maintenance among them. The use of var has long been understood to be problematic due to footguns with scoping issues. It's the reason "let" was introduced into the language, and is pretty much exclusively used now. The pythonic approach isn't a problem per-se, but it also introduces additional complexity which makes maintenance more challenging. From an organizational standpoint, it's difficult to attract and retain good talent to work on dated code. I don't think any developer would be excited to put "Bootstrap 3" on their resume today. If you can't attract and retain good talent, your company and project will suffer. Software is like a house, there are many complex systems that need periodic maintenance and updating. Sometimes you can remodel the house to get rid of the aluminum wiring, etc... and modernize it. Sometimes it's cheaper to tear down and rebuild. But I don't think anyone would argue "Well, it hasn't fallen over yet so just leave it". [1] https://endoflife.date/bootstrap https://endoflife.date/bootstrap
  - petersirka 4y ago
    We only use Bootstrap v3's grid system (CSS).
  - viraptor 4y ago
    > I don't think any developer would be excited to put "Bootstrap 3" on their resume today Would anyone put Bootstrap 3 specifically? Using a newer version is not a massive difference. You'd also put "Ruby" on your resume, rather than "Ruby 2".
  - capableweb 4y ago
    > This is a problem for many reasons, security and maintenance among them How exactly are those problems with Bootstrap 3? Security, in a CSS "framework"? If it works, it works. You don't have to update everything to the latest version to get some sort of "easy to maintain" badge, things don't change quickly enough for that to make sense. Picking one version and sticking with it is a valid choice for "maintenance" as well as saying "we're gonna be on the latest version within N weeks of release".
Boxxed 4y ago
> This is an extremely cool project, but after browsing the source code a bit, it looks like it's badly in need of modernization. Just wait until I tell you about the code in your OS, your car, and your phone...

petersirka 4y ago

The code isn't terrible, but it's not clear to you because you don't have the necessary information. The Total.js UI library (jComponent) is now 50% backward compatible with the UI library that you opened in 2014! You must know that we want to keep long-term backward compatibility. It's not a 100% nice code and of course, we will release a new version v20 (of UI library) this or next year cleared from the older code. We must offer stable tools for development, and that's critical for us and our customers. This platform has been developed for around 10 years, and it isn't easy, but we will keep doing this since it is our hobby.

claytongulick 4y ago
I think the project is very cool, and I'm impressed with the amount of functionality it has. I do think there's a considerable burden of technical debt in the current code base right now that the company will need to develop a strategy to address, which is absolutely normal for a project of this scope and age. It's a tough challenge, one I've faced several times. Given the clear technical talent I see with the project, I have every confidence that it's a challenge that will be overcome, and I'm looking forward to watching the project and seeing how it progresses.

devrand 4y ago

Why can't code just be old? If it's stable, sustainable, and able to deliver on customer needs, then who cares? The only benefit at that point be to prevent people nitpicking that their code uses "var".

claytongulick 4y ago
In most cases, I'd agree with you - but I think this one is a little different since the customer is a technical implementer building a product. For some use cases, I think it would be fine - internal tools that need a quick and easy solution, perhaps. But I don't think anyone feels great about building a product on an aging foundation. Would you select Angular 1 as a UI framework for a new project today? Also, I think it's hard to make a good argument for single letter variable names, except in very rare cases. Unfortunately, in this code base their use is the norm rather than the exception.

bakugo 4y ago

> CSS is Bootstrap 3. > there's liberal use of "var" > The components implementation is very pythonic - it passes "self" around to decorate with functions Could you explain why these things are bad, other than "it's not the hip and trendy way to do things"?

claytongulick 4y ago
Sure. Using Bootstrap 3 is a problem because it hasn't been supported for over three years and is no longer actively maintained [1]. This is a problem for many reasons, security and maintenance among them. The use of var has long been understood to be problematic due to footguns with scoping issues. It's the reason "let" was introduced into the language, and is pretty much exclusively used now. The pythonic approach isn't a problem per-se, but it also introduces additional complexity which makes maintenance more challenging. From an organizational standpoint, it's difficult to attract and retain good talent to work on dated code. I don't think any developer would be excited to put "Bootstrap 3" on their resume today. If you can't attract and retain good talent, your company and project will suffer. Software is like a house, there are many complex systems that need periodic maintenance and updating. Sometimes you can remodel the house to get rid of the aluminum wiring, etc... and modernize it. Sometimes it's cheaper to tear down and rebuild. But I don't think anyone would argue "Well, it hasn't fallen over yet so just leave it". [1] https://endoflife.date/bootstrap https://endoflife.date/bootstrap
- petersirka 4y ago
  We only use Bootstrap v3's grid system (CSS).
- viraptor 4y ago
  > I don't think any developer would be excited to put "Bootstrap 3" on their resume today Would anyone put Bootstrap 3 specifically? Using a newer version is not a massive difference. You'd also put "Ruby" on your resume, rather than "Ruby 2".
- capableweb 4y ago
  > This is a problem for many reasons, security and maintenance among them How exactly are those problems with Bootstrap 3? Security, in a CSS "framework"? If it works, it works. You don't have to update everything to the latest version to get some sort of "easy to maintain" badge, things don't change quickly enough for that to make sense. Picking one version and sticking with it is a valid choice for "maintenance" as well as saying "we're gonna be on the latest version within N weeks of release".

Boxxed 4y ago

> This is an extremely cool project, but after browsing the source code a bit, it looks like it's badly in need of modernization. Just wait until I tell you about the code in your OS, your car, and your phone...