3 ms·
It drives me nuts. I spend probably 1/5 of my time doing front-end (but have been around through all of the generations you mention) and after re-org after re-o
by newhouseb 13y ago
It drives me nuts. I spend probably 1/5 of my time doing front-end (but have been around through all of the generations you mention) and after re-org after re-org I've finally settled on a build system with a Makefile and browserify to package things up that isn't an enormous monstrosity of 1000 different node packages and bajillion-step build progress.
Frankly, I think that a large part the problems in front-end have to do with how hard it is to write maintainable JS w/ a proper separation of responsibilities, due to the way JS files are loaded/have no coherent module system (on the front-end that is). Because there is no standard module system (and yes I know about CommonJS and AMD loaders, but both have issues), to use a given component you oftentimes have to adapt an entire philosophy of package management that can lock you out of other packaging philosophies. In the end, we have millions of front-end programmers saying, "eh it seems like to much work to integrate this packaging philosophy, I'll just write my own duplicate copy/library." So basically projects silo themselves off and share little code until someone decides on yet another package philosophy (see: http://xkcd.com/927/ http://xkcd.com/927/).
People love to write build system after build system, in every field, a fetish I've never quite understood. Makefiles build some of the most widely used/complicated packages out there.
And as a final note, I'm really excited about emscripten in allowing front-end developers to move away from designing abstractions around JS/DOM in such a way that eventually we can stop relying on JS and rely on more the same primitives we use everywhere else in programming.
- l0u 13y ago>People love to write build system after build system, in every field, a fetish I've never quite understood. I have a firm suspicion its what writing a framework, cms, or blogging platform used to be. In time the leader will show itself and people will get the message that this project is no longer fun and trendy. I have to agree makefiles are pretty much the be all and end all when it comes to building projects. It offers pretty much all the power you could need. The only plausible reason for makefiles to not be suitable for a culture brought up on shiny macbooks and "GUI's" would be that not many people want to deal with the complexity which comes from having that much power. http://www.chemie.fu-berlin.de/chemnet/use/info/make/make_16.html#SEC116 http://www.chemie.fu-berlin.de/chemnet/use/info/make/make_16... Take this for example. Its pretty hard to look at let alone understand. That scare is probably reason enough alone for a bunch of wheel2.0s to be created. The 183 page plain text manual doesnt help much either. Its too daunting for today's culture. Its just not about being correct and feature complete anymore, its about having the path of least resistance. Simple makefiles are simple, but nobody upvotes a hacker news article about how amazingly easy makefiles are.