42 ms·

JavaScript architecture skills evolved much more slowly than traditional back-end web development and of course it's more difficult to monitor errors that happe

JavaScript architecture skills evolved much more slowly than traditional back-end web development and of course it's more difficult to monitor errors that happen on the client side, so yes, it's still a reality that there is a correlation between heavy javascript and broken pages. However I don't think citing the problems with Flash and Java Applets is applicable. JavaScript maturity is explicitly the long-awaited remedy to the problems of those bolted-on runtimes. It's true that bloated over-the-top CPU-hogging monstrosities will be done with JS as with prior technologies, but there's no technology that is immune to that. FWIW, Ember is pretty performance-oriented and lets you get a lot done with a very low code / performance / byte overhead.

TheZenPsycho 13y ago
Javascript is no cure-all. Just like flash and java, avoiding the subjugation of built-in browser features (back button, bookmarking, hyperlinks, context menus, copy and paste) requires explicit effort many developers simply don't give either out of laziness or ignorance. Being able to CURL any page on your site and parse it using standardized, agreed upon tag names is a feature.
- radq 13y ago
  > Being able to CURL any page on your site and parse it using standardized, agreed upon tag names is a feature. But the vast majority of my users don't even know what cURL is, so why should I worry about this? And in any case, I believe that if I wanted to extract content programmatically, consuming the same API that the Javascript uses to fetch content would be much easier than extracting it from HTML.
  - TheZenPsycho 13y ago
    The vast majority of users don't know what a bookmark, a URL or a back button is. This isn't any kind of argument. We don't do the right thing because people know about it. We do it because it doesn't secretly break so many of the conveniences we're used to. We. Us. Power users. Hackers. Tell me, why should you be lazy just because you think the vast majority of your audience are fools and won't notice?
- dasil003 13y ago
  -sigh- why would you take that away from my comment? The point is that javascript makes it possible to build a performant and smoothly integrated web app where with Java and Flash by their plugin nature it is impossible.

TheZenPsycho 13y ago

Javascript is no cure-all. Just like flash and java, avoiding the subjugation of built-in browser features (back button, bookmarking, hyperlinks, context menus, copy and paste) requires explicit effort many developers simply don't give either out of laziness or ignorance. Being able to CURL any page on your site and parse it using standardized, agreed upon tag names is a feature.

radq 13y ago
> Being able to CURL any page on your site and parse it using standardized, agreed upon tag names is a feature. But the vast majority of my users don't even know what cURL is, so why should I worry about this? And in any case, I believe that if I wanted to extract content programmatically, consuming the same API that the Javascript uses to fetch content would be much easier than extracting it from HTML.
- TheZenPsycho 13y ago
  The vast majority of users don't know what a bookmark, a URL or a back button is. This isn't any kind of argument. We don't do the right thing because people know about it. We do it because it doesn't secretly break so many of the conveniences we're used to. We. Us. Power users. Hackers. Tell me, why should you be lazy just because you think the vast majority of your audience are fools and won't notice?
dasil003 13y ago
-sigh- why would you take that away from my comment? The point is that javascript makes it possible to build a performant and smoothly integrated web app where with Java and Flash by their plugin nature it is impossible.