5 ms·

Cutesy cartoon saying no JavaScript but all examples are JavaScript. Html first but you need npm install. Convinced this is satire designed to annoy me.

mattw2121 3y ago
Same thing. Saw "No Javascript" and then went to the example app....nothing but Javascript?
- nonethewiser 3y ago
  it says "No Javascript required unless you want it", not just "No Javascript."
  - mark38848 3y ago
    One would expect better reading comprehension from people who want websites to look like it's 1993.
    - Takennickname 3y ago
      As opposed to this cute website that's built for toddlers.
  - mattw2121 3y ago
    The very first mention of Javascript on the site is a huge graphic (full width) that says "NO JAVASCRIPT REQUIRED".
    - tsuujin 3y ago
      The very next item on the page is another huge graphic which says “unless you want it”.
      - mattw2121 3y ago
        Agreed...and honestly I didn't scroll any further. I saw, "No Javascript Required" and scrolled back to the top, went to the docs and looked at the example so I could see what this was like. Then I saw Javascript. I just think that if you are saying so boldly that you don't need to use Javascript, then maybe your first example should be without Javascript?
        tsuujin 3y ago
        Yeah, that seems like a reasonable take. FWIW I kind of feel like “no js” may be a pipe dream today. I see a lot of talk about it but very few sites actually do it; there just seems to be a lot of pressure to use the next big JS framework in the community. Also analytics and so forth.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - jklinger410 3y ago
    Their website would probably be better if they actually drank their own kool-aid.
ekianjo 3y ago
Yeah when I saw npm... "no javascript unless you want to?", really? Looks like the author really wants you to use Javascript
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- monsieurbanana 3y ago
  The title has full stack very prominently. Did you expect to code the backend in css?
  - apocalyptic0n3 3y ago
    Last week, we had PHP on the desktop. I fully expect to see a full backend framework written in CSS by the end of August.
    - rob 3y ago
      You might like this: https://dev.to/thormeier/dont-try-this-at-home-css-as-the-backend-what-3oih https://dev.to/thormeier/dont-try-this-at-home-css-as-the-ba... We already solved the CSS-as-a-backend problem. Too easy!
      - apocalyptic0n3 3y ago
        I daresay I saw this by the end of August, so I was technically correct. Jokes aside, this is every bit as unsurprising and dumb as I had hoped it would be. It's perfect.
monsieurbanana 3y ago
Yes, instead of npm they should have used hpm the html package manager. Jokes aside, it's a full stack framework, you need some server-side language. It's the served html that is (optionally) javascript-free.
kitd 3y ago
I think most people understand that "no Javascript" applies to the client. You can't exactly write a backend in pure HTML.
- brazzy 3y ago
  Remember ColdFusion? Sure, not exactly "pure", but the point was basically to make it look like that.
jklinger410 3y ago
Cannot stress enough how every framework for development that starts with "npm install" is inaccessible to most amateurs by its very nature. I'm not sure what drives developers to be so insular with thought and make so many assumptions about others. It seems like basic gate-keeping activity, but maybe it's just ignorance.
- threatofrain 3y ago
  I'd say otherwise. JS is one of the largest and most vibrant communities because it is the opposite of hard. And because the amount of investment you get in and the amount of payoff you get out is emotionally delightful. And because there is a huge and competitive ecology of pedagogy on YT and other places. You don't get to this size because it's so hard. People aren't joining JS for the relatively low prestige, they aren't joining because the paycheck compares any better to any other part of the industry, and they aren't joining because of any promise of intellectual development — they're joining because it's the most accessible doorway in the tech community today. There's no other part of the industry that's so clogged with amateurs trying to join. The only other industry I can think of which is so hot in its community energy would be Python and ML, but they appeal with a different set of values. ML is hot because it's prestigious, ML is hot because the job market is insanely hot, ML is hot because it promises boundless intellectual exploration.
  - cosmotic 3y ago
    I'm a senior software engineer with 20 years experience and I still struggle with npm/yarn nearly every time I use it. In my experience, the most senior people on JS teams also struggle with dependency problems, react, etc constantly. This is not a struggle I experience or see others experiencing with Java or C#. Python environments and tools can be frustrating but not anywhere near as much as JS tools.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- THENATHE 3y ago

mattw2121 3y ago

Same thing. Saw "No Javascript" and then went to the example app....nothing but Javascript?

nonethewiser 3y ago
it says "No Javascript required unless you want it", not just "No Javascript."
- mark38848 3y ago
  One would expect better reading comprehension from people who want websites to look like it's 1993.
  - Takennickname 3y ago
    As opposed to this cute website that's built for toddlers.
- mattw2121 3y ago
  The very first mention of Javascript on the site is a huge graphic (full width) that says "NO JAVASCRIPT REQUIRED".
  - tsuujin 3y ago
    The very next item on the page is another huge graphic which says “unless you want it”.
    - mattw2121 3y ago
      Agreed...and honestly I didn't scroll any further. I saw, "No Javascript Required" and scrolled back to the top, went to the docs and looked at the example so I could see what this was like. Then I saw Javascript. I just think that if you are saying so boldly that you don't need to use Javascript, then maybe your first example should be without Javascript?
      - tsuujin 3y ago
        Yeah, that seems like a reasonable take. FWIW I kind of feel like “no js” may be a pipe dream today. I see a lot of talk about it but very few sites actually do it; there just seems to be a lot of pressure to use the next big JS framework in the community. Also analytics and so forth.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- jklinger410 3y ago
  Their website would probably be better if they actually drank their own kool-aid.

ekianjo 3y ago

Yeah when I saw npm... "no javascript unless you want to?", really? Looks like the author really wants you to use Javascript

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
monsieurbanana 3y ago
The title has full stack very prominently. Did you expect to code the backend in css?
- apocalyptic0n3 3y ago
  Last week, we had PHP on the desktop. I fully expect to see a full backend framework written in CSS by the end of August.
  - rob 3y ago
    You might like this: https://dev.to/thormeier/dont-try-this-at-home-css-as-the-backend-what-3oih https://dev.to/thormeier/dont-try-this-at-home-css-as-the-ba... We already solved the CSS-as-a-backend problem. Too easy!
    - apocalyptic0n3 3y ago
      I daresay I saw this by the end of August, so I was technically correct. Jokes aside, this is every bit as unsurprising and dumb as I had hoped it would be. It's perfect.

monsieurbanana 3y ago

Yes, instead of npm they should have used hpm the html package manager. Jokes aside, it's a full stack framework, you need some server-side language. It's the served html that is (optionally) javascript-free.

kitd 3y ago

I think most people understand that "no Javascript" applies to the client. You can't exactly write a backend in pure HTML.

brazzy 3y ago
Remember ColdFusion? Sure, not exactly "pure", but the point was basically to make it look like that.

jklinger410 3y ago

Cannot stress enough how every framework for development that starts with "npm install" is inaccessible to most amateurs by its very nature. I'm not sure what drives developers to be so insular with thought and make so many assumptions about others. It seems like basic gate-keeping activity, but maybe it's just ignorance.

threatofrain 3y ago
I'd say otherwise. JS is one of the largest and most vibrant communities because it is the opposite of hard. And because the amount of investment you get in and the amount of payoff you get out is emotionally delightful. And because there is a huge and competitive ecology of pedagogy on YT and other places. You don't get to this size because it's so hard. People aren't joining JS for the relatively low prestige, they aren't joining because the paycheck compares any better to any other part of the industry, and they aren't joining because of any promise of intellectual development — they're joining because it's the most accessible doorway in the tech community today. There's no other part of the industry that's so clogged with amateurs trying to join. The only other industry I can think of which is so hot in its community energy would be Python and ML, but they appeal with a different set of values. ML is hot because it's prestigious, ML is hot because the job market is insanely hot, ML is hot because it promises boundless intellectual exploration.
- cosmotic 3y ago
  I'm a senior software engineer with 20 years experience and I still struggle with npm/yarn nearly every time I use it. In my experience, the most senior people on JS teams also struggle with dependency problems, react, etc constantly. This is not a struggle I experience or see others experiencing with Java or C#. Python environments and tools can be frustrating but not anywhere near as much as JS tools.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
THENATHE 3y ago