> 2 extra frameworks (backbone and underscore), Neither backbone nor underscore are frameworks. First is just some skeleton structure, second is just a lib of

> 2 extra frameworks (backbone and underscore), Neither backbone nor underscore are frameworks. First is just some skeleton structure, second is just a lib of useful functions. When writing larger applications you are likely to reinvent both. Badly. > in addition to still needing jQuery I swapped jQuery to Zepto in the middle of the development of the project without problems. Sure, they are intended to be compatible, but anyway. > Backbone is so needlessly open-ended and directionless that a dev who doesn't > already know how to write good code will just write worse code. And a developer who does know how to write a good code can use backbone instead of writing they own version. > The other technique I use for modules to talk to each other is sheerly through event > signatures. If you have a login module, it can emit events like "loggedin" or > "loggedout". Any other module can subscribe to those events and do their own thing, > without interfering with others, etc. > This pattern works very well and is a hell of a lot more usable than anything I've > ever been able to do with Backbone. Funny, but I am doing the second with Backbone. I have Backbone events in views and global events wherever I need them. And I use Backbone.Events for that too. > Coffeescript is not JavaScript. It's another annoying abstraction. No, it is another way to write JavaScript. So pleasant that after I wile you sigh when you have to write plain Javascript again. > Get back to basics, learn how to structure your code, Good advice. > and just get some fucking work done. And Backbone will help with this a lot. Some people just hate anything popular. Things can be popular for various reasons. Being damn good for the task is one of them.