2 ms·

That, while well intentioned, is probably wishful thinking. Large frameworks do not exist to provide technology capabilities or features. They exist to supple

That, while well intentioned, is probably wishful thinking. Large frameworks do not exist to provide technology capabilities or features. They exist to supplement skill deficits in people, primarily around architecture and composition, and any such features are built upon the stylistic premise they provide.

awesomeMilou 3y ago
> They exist to supplement skill deficits in people, primarily around architecture and composition That's just another hot take which makes no sense if you think about it. Being able to fit complex features into already existing abstractions is an even more sought after skill with frameworks than without. Frameworks exist to standardize architecture, not to mitigate skill issues.
- austin-cheney 3y ago
  > Frameworks exist to standardize architecture, not to mitigate skill issues. It's a pre-formulated architecture in a box so that developers don't have to make those such decisions, most often because they can't. That is a supplement for an absence of skills, the same reason that made jQuery popular.
  - awesomeMilou 3y ago
    > the same reason that made jQuery popular. jQuery emerged from a lack of standardization and features in web browsers. It was a huge step forward and some of it's core features were standardized as extensions of the DOM interface (DOM queries are an example of this) > most often because they can't The issue isn't skill, it's a question of common architecure. A batteries included framework gives you exactly one choice for each part of your core architecture, which accelerates development because you don't have to worry about it. In addition, it saves you time and _immense_ costs on maintaining the core architecture of your app. React is a bad example due to it's simplicity, but take Angular or Ruby on Rails. Lot's of choices made for you, so you can benefit from the ecosystem.
albrewer 3y ago
> They exist to supplement skill deficits in people This take really does not take into account the huge value added of 1) not having to roll your own SPA code and 2) the availability of a large workforce that is all familiar with a common design paradigm.
- austin-cheney 3y ago
  That is true, but it completely misses the point because rolling your own SPA is next to trivial. Things like state management, event delegation, and modularity are challenging without frameworks but only if you have never tried that without some large framework. Every time I bring this up the common rebuttal is immediately quitting, something like: "I tried it once and it was tough, so therefore it can't be done". That just screams skills deficit.

awesomeMilou 3y ago

> They exist to supplement skill deficits in people, primarily around architecture and composition That's just another hot take which makes no sense if you think about it. Being able to fit complex features into already existing abstractions is an even more sought after skill with frameworks than without. Frameworks exist to standardize architecture, not to mitigate skill issues.

austin-cheney 3y ago
> Frameworks exist to standardize architecture, not to mitigate skill issues. It's a pre-formulated architecture in a box so that developers don't have to make those such decisions, most often because they can't. That is a supplement for an absence of skills, the same reason that made jQuery popular.
- awesomeMilou 3y ago
  > the same reason that made jQuery popular. jQuery emerged from a lack of standardization and features in web browsers. It was a huge step forward and some of it's core features were standardized as extensions of the DOM interface (DOM queries are an example of this) > most often because they can't The issue isn't skill, it's a question of common architecure. A batteries included framework gives you exactly one choice for each part of your core architecture, which accelerates development because you don't have to worry about it. In addition, it saves you time and _immense_ costs on maintaining the core architecture of your app. React is a bad example due to it's simplicity, but take Angular or Ruby on Rails. Lot's of choices made for you, so you can benefit from the ecosystem.

albrewer 3y ago

> They exist to supplement skill deficits in people This take really does not take into account the huge value added of 1) not having to roll your own SPA code and 2) the availability of a large workforce that is all familiar with a common design paradigm.

austin-cheney 3y ago
That is true, but it completely misses the point because rolling your own SPA is next to trivial. Things like state management, event delegation, and modularity are challenging without frameworks but only if you have never tried that without some large framework. Every time I bring this up the common rebuttal is immediately quitting, something like: "I tried it once and it was tough, so therefore it can't be done". That just screams skills deficit.