19 ms·
I really don't want to be that guy, but... Vanilla JavaScript already exists as a popular term for JavaScript without any framework. No jQuery, no React - jus
by SquareWheel 3y ago
I really don't want to be that guy, but... Vanilla JavaScript already exists as a popular term for JavaScript without any framework. No jQuery, no React - just JavaScript. Calling a library VanJS (as short for "Vanilla JavaScript") is just going to cause confusion.
The repo's own description uses the phrase vanilla JavaScript in this way, and even mixes both meanings within a single sentence.
If the author likes the theme, I'm sure they can still use it indirectly. eg. "icecream.js: add a scoop of vanilla to your project". Or "Go nuts and sprinkle in some Reactive syntax". It's still very punnable, I assure you.
- rawoke083600 3y agoYea kinda felt the same, when reading the name and desc. Whats the value of names or terms if we keep reassigning a different meaning to it ? Especially in the tech industry. Also it's almost immoral calling "a new" project "lightweight" and "small". Of course it is lightweight and small, it's a new project ! Wait for bug submissions, feature requests, feature parity, time, edge cases etc. Anywhoo congrats on shipping something.
- ptx 3y ago> Also it's almost immoral calling "a new" project "lightweight" and "small". Of course it is lightweight and small, it's a new project ! Unless it's Swing, where a "lightweight" component is one that uses enormous piles of slow Java code to duplicate native platform functionality.
- Sohcahtoa82 3y agoNever understood why Java duplicated (poorly) native platform functionality rather than merely acting as a wrapper around the native platform.
- aspyct 3y agoYes, please be that guy. Or I'll do it. Vanilla Javascript refers indeed to "javascript without a framework". So creating a framework and calling it "vanilla javascript" is... wrong?
- FrankyHollywood 3y agoA framework build not to be a framework, it's almost philosophical :) https://plato.stanford.edu/Archives/Fall2012/entries/liar-paradox/ https://plato.stanford.edu/Archives/Fall2012/entries/liar-pa...
- jitl 3y agoIt’s 93 lines, less than most CSS resets. Small enough to copy paste to the top of your index.html in a script tag. You can use it without NPM, webpack, a special compiler pass, or a template language. Seems pretty vanilla compared to the full fat, popular alternatives.
- not_your_vase 3y agoSeems pretty vanilla compared to the full fat, popular alternatives? Absolutely! Does it seem vanilla compared to vanilla? Haha..
- jwarren 3y agoYou're mixing metaphors there! It might be lightweight but it's still a flavour. It's still not part of the common browser API, so yes it's easy to add, but no, it's not vanilla.
- ohgodplsno 3y agoMinified React is 1 line, line length isn't exactly a great judge of how much it does. It's 3KB of barely documented code.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- progx 3y agoThat is why the name is only half vanilla: van ;-)
- rob74 3y agoThey could have taken another part of vanilla and called it nilJS, but unfortunately JS uses null and not nil, so it doesn't quite work...
- BerislavLopac 3y agoCould have named it StraciatellaJS then. ;)
- progx 3y agoA following JS-Framework ;)
- nathell 3y agoThis. I originally thought this was a rebranding of http://vanilla-js.com/ http://vanilla-js.com/ and I'm disappointed.
- vmfunction 3y agowhat is interesting about that is when I saw solid.js performance chart, it is the closest to vanilla js in terms of performance.
- MrJohz 3y agoSolidJS is probably the closest thing to a vanillaJS framework that you can get, in that 90% of the time it's doing the same DOM manipulations you would be doing, but with a nicer interface. So if an update causes a class to change, there's no tree to diff - that class attribute gets changed directly. The non-Vanilla stuff is the signals implementation, which is kind of an RxJS-esque observable system, but more lightweight, and more push-based. It's very similar to Svelte, but with a React/hooks-like API (although far fewer rules to remember!) As I understand it, this system is pretty efficient, which means for simple use-cases, it's not adding much overhead over basic vanilla stuff. The disadvantages (because there are always some) mainly come from the small ecosystem - there's not many off-the-shelf design toolkits, the documentation is a bit scratchy, etc. That community is still growing though, so that stuff will get there.
- rob74 3y agoSo now we have a framework that doesn't want to be a framework? They might call it "VoidJS" instead, as in void = vacuum = so lightweight it's almost as if there's nothing there?
- alex_suzuki 3y agoHey, that’s actually a pretty cool name.
- mbork_pl 3y agoOr Null.js. Or undefined.js. And now I want to create a library/framework/whatever called NaN.js...
- usrbinbash 3y agoWould that be equal to zero.js?
- mbork_pl 3y agoOr even better: objectObject.js! Also, Infinity.js sounds like a really cool name, too...
- mattigames 3y agoYeah, just call it VanJS everywhere and never call it "Vanilla JavaScript" and that would be good enough.
- jatins 3y agoI also thought this was a "joke" on how you don't need a framework. But looks like it is indeed a framework so definitely confusing name. I do like the idea of it. A lot of value of React for me is in the composition model and could see this being useful for small projects
- croes 3y agoHow about an alternative name like Pure JS (already taken), JS Only, No-Framwork framework
- Max-q 3y agoI came to be that guy. Vanilla JavaScript is the term for plain JS without any framework, library or plugins.
- tracker1 3y agowindow.$ = (selector) => applyExtendedTools(Array.from(document.querySelectorAll(selector))); Oh noes, I'm now using a defacto Framework, even if I wrote the applyExtendedTools and the $ function to give me something like a lighter jQuery.
- dreamcompiler 3y agoKinda like calling a cloud server "serverless." Or a software development platform a "no-code" solution. Apparently all the cool marketing kids now want you to call your widget company "widgetless." Paraphrasing EJD's critique of Ada, "This stupid idea will take 5 years and a billion dollars to kill."
- stcg 3y agoI agree. I was confused reading the page and expected a description of a pattern I could use in actual vanilla JavaScript without any dependencies. The term 'zero-dependency' played a role in my confusion. "VanJS" is a dependency.
- ironmagma 3y agoDon’t you know, it’s 2023 and we’ve decided words don’t mean anything?
- Waterluvian 3y agoI love your suggestion and slogan.
- campbel 3y ago100% I thought this was a meme repo like nocode
- not_your_vase 3y ago[flagged]
- duxup 3y agoI feel like saying that you don’t want to judge someone and then generalizing about people like them is pretty much putting that judgment out there.
- not_your_vase 3y agoSaying "I don't want to judge" doesn't mean that I can avoid doing it (unless I avoid writing the thing down completely). There are things that can't be written down without hidden (or obvious) judgement. This is one of those.
- duxup 3y agoWhy would you say you don’t want to judge if that’s what you’re going to do anyway?
- pessimizer 3y agoIt's been explained well. If you want to point out a fact that paints someone in a bad light, but you are concerned about the fact rather than making people feel bad, you say "I don't want to judge, but [what I say here implies a judgement.]" For example: "I don't want to judge, but I bought a gallon of milk three days ago and didn't get to use a drop of it." My concern isn't that you feel bad about drinking the milk or to paint you as a milk thief to others, my concern is that I bought milk and I didn't get to drink it. I'm being forced to offer a judgement in order to talk about my own experience.
- duxup 3y ago>If you want to point out a fact that paints someone in a bad light, but you are concerned about the fact rather than making people feel bad What you do is that you just don't say it... that's what you do if you're actually concerned about painting someone in a bad light / don't know if the fact applies at all.
- paulddraper 3y agoPeople are running their code on servers calling it "serverless." We've somehow accepted that nomenclature.
- scotty79 3y agoIt's very effective naming strategy. It's called VanJS not Vanilla JavaScript. But it's kinda hard to remember Van, or any letters really. By association of it's main quality which is small size/simplicity with common term such as vanilla JavaScript, suddenly VanJS becomes memorable. Similarly vanilla js was named like that, after common term describing plain flavor of icecream. Which was weird to me, and I learned that as a non-native speaker only after I heard about vanilla js.