2 ms·

This looks like hate speech: > Current frameworks persuade false beliefs with shiny websites and finely crafted marketing without transparent, scientific analy

This looks like hate speech: > Current frameworks persuade false beliefs with shiny websites and finely crafted marketing without transparent, scientific analysis. They solve hypothetical problems and cause new problems instead. Unfortunately, large communities are dealing with irrelevant issues. You're telling jashkenas (indirectly) that he "persuade false beliefs", "without scientific analysis", that he's solving "hypothetical problems" and "dealing with irrelevant issues" and plenty of other things like that... and what response do you expect from him? > I was hoping you were closer to a scientist. You already told him he's not a scientist, see above. P.S.: I don't follow any "religion". I use framework or plain JavaScript depending on the project, and I find it sad when anyone promotes their solution as the only good one.

tipiirai 13y ago
It's not hate speech. The blog entry states that you can implement the Todo MVC app with 1kb of extra code on top of jQuery and the end result is smaller, modular and faster. This is big news. The statements on the post are indeed bold but I think they are still valid. They should deserve a better response IMHO. This seriously questions the relevance of current client-side frameworks. Without constructive criticism should we just agree that others are bigger, slower and less productive ??
- sorich87 13y ago
  - 1kb + jQuery is bigger (or almost the same size) as the other ones without jQuery (except Ember.js). - Comparing template engines only (with the riot solution having less features) doesn't give a complete picture for comparing speed. There are dozen of other parts to make a web app. The template is only a small part. Benchmarks aren't even a good way to compare speed. It's how the user feels when using the resulting app and interacting with the UI that matters. - TodoMVC is a very small app for comparing productivity. E.g. your router implementation doesn't take into account IE bugs, and researching such bugs instead of using a proven solution can be less productive. I agree with you that modular and maintainable web apps can be developed with jQuery only, and even plain JavaScript only. I dislike, as much as you do, "Backbone developers", "AngularJS developers", "Ember.js developers", etc. who can use only one framework, can't properly structure an app without using a framework, and claim that the framework they use is the only good one to solve any problems and build any type of app. A good developer should be able to choose the proper solution for a particular problem. There's no one size fits all solution for every problem.

tipiirai 13y ago

It's not hate speech. The blog entry states that you can implement the Todo MVC app with 1kb of extra code on top of jQuery and the end result is smaller, modular and faster. This is big news. The statements on the post are indeed bold but I think they are still valid. They should deserve a better response IMHO. This seriously questions the relevance of current client-side frameworks. Without constructive criticism should we just agree that others are bigger, slower and less productive ??

sorich87 13y ago
- 1kb + jQuery is bigger (or almost the same size) as the other ones without jQuery (except Ember.js). - Comparing template engines only (with the riot solution having less features) doesn't give a complete picture for comparing speed. There are dozen of other parts to make a web app. The template is only a small part. Benchmarks aren't even a good way to compare speed. It's how the user feels when using the resulting app and interacting with the UI that matters. - TodoMVC is a very small app for comparing productivity. E.g. your router implementation doesn't take into account IE bugs, and researching such bugs instead of using a proven solution can be less productive. I agree with you that modular and maintainable web apps can be developed with jQuery only, and even plain JavaScript only. I dislike, as much as you do, "Backbone developers", "AngularJS developers", "Ember.js developers", etc. who can use only one framework, can't properly structure an app without using a framework, and claim that the framework they use is the only good one to solve any problems and build any type of app. A good developer should be able to choose the proper solution for a particular problem. There's no one size fits all solution for every problem.