3 ms·
Honestly it's only frustrating if you approach it with an "all or nothing" mindset. Your site doesn't have to be all-singing, all-dancing. In fact it's probably
by wackget 2y ago
Honestly it's only frustrating if you approach it with an "all or nothing" mindset. Your site doesn't have to be all-singing, all-dancing. In fact it's probably better off being simple. To wit, you don't need async/AJAX stuff (unless you're making a chat app or something).
You definitely don't need a framework and you might actually be able to avoid using JavaScript altogether. I use jQuery only because I like the elegant/terse syntax and I struggle to think of any type of "ordinary" website where you'd need anything else.
If you approach frontend like "I need to use React/Angular" then yeah, you're gonna bash your head against a wall, because it's an entire new ecosystem and paradigm to learn.
- anakaine 2y agoI would like to have something that looks nice and modern, has a good user experience, and is responsive. Those three requirements take me pretty close to the "too ahrd" rabbit hole most of the time. Not always, just often enough.
- jpc0 2y agoApart from one or two things that are currently not implemented well by the browsers, your requirements can be met without a single line of JS or even a server at that. And you may very well not run into those one or two things.
- anakaine 2y agoCould I ask you to elaborate futher? I dont see how a single line of js can remove the need for front end design, complexities of scaling, theme choices, and user friendly design patterns with interactivity.