• 3
    I still dont understand the need for frontend frameworks. Everything they do can be done with like 3 lines of native code and that way maybe your site will not load in 5 seconds.

    (Except animation and responsive frameworks, fuck i aint coding that)
  • 5
    @BindView whaaat?
  • 7
    @ljiech thanks for the meaningful conversation
  • 4
    @BindView ,you saying this shows how unfamiliar you are with frontend development.
  • 3
    @diavel tell me 3 things you can do with say angular and cant do with w3js
  • 4
    Load 400kb to use ng-repeat @BindView
  • 0
    @azous yeah, guess 12kb is a lot more
  • 9
    @BindView Yeah you can do everying on js because its based on fcking js. else how could it even work. Its about optimizing client experience. Please show me the same speed of dom manipulation in a large app you write from scratch. It offers you lazyloading, caching out of the box,... Its about using things that were 1938791x tested in a production enviroment. its about using the same thing as millions of developers use so code can be shared and ideas implemented. the ammount of code there its for a reason. if you think you can optimize the code and its size then i think google would love you to join them. angular is based on large applications and saves you fuckload of work. If you plan to use it for a single ng-repeat then its not anngular fault but urs
    Dont shittalk peoples hardwork because you are one od the knowitall arrogant coders. Fuck it. Go hardcore. Go reinvent the wheel and place it on ur car, or even carriage.
  • 1
    @ljiech chill bro its a prank dont hurt ur thumbs
  • 2
    @BindView , @ljiech said pretty much everything.
  • 0
    chill, you may spill your pumpkin latte
  • 7
    @ljiech In my experience, most angular/react/vue sites offer a shittier experience, because there is so much library overhead, even after minifying/chunking/caching.

    I think SPA is wrong. You can't predict how well all devices handle buckets of JS, even when using transpiled code, simply because some devices are slow.

    Servers can dynamically scale, and offer a predictable reliable performance to end users. Most frontends are bandaids on stupid badly designed backends.

    A good backend offers the user exactly what they need at that moment, in a few milliseconds... at which point you really don't need much frontend logic, just good frontend design.

    There are some sites using above frameworks well... but most lather it thickly on top of a broken API, making things utterly untestable and unreliable.
  • 3
    @bittersweet , where are you getting this info from? Untestable and unreliable? With angular I'm able to write modular and reusable components that have APIs of their own and are completely testable.

    How do SPAs offer shitty user experience I wonder? SPAs coupled with PWAs are amazing! It gives web so much more power that it can rival native applications. I do agree that it is a bit heavy but the good outweighs the bad.
  • 1

    It's like carrying a heavy toolbox from the garage to your room, when really all you wanted was a screwdriver.

    Of course, It offers you the ability to flexibly access all the things in your toolbox in your room, and in certain situations that is what you want.

    I respect the solutions which compromise, which say: "Let's not grab the whole toolbox, but fetch a few screwdrivers you might need so you don't have to walk twice". Fair enough.

    But too many hipster startups are so frontend-heavy that they don't understand that sum, avg, max, etc are available in SQL as well. There are just so many React apps built on top of a API which basically does something like "select * from table", and pours that overized dataset through a bunch of filters/maps/reduces with two-way binding to an webapp interface.

    It's not the frontend framework's fault... it's just too often used as an ugly bandaid on a broken backend, and I think React/etc is often even overkill for the use case.
  • 1
    @bittersweet so I am a full stack developer even tho I prefer frontend. What I have noticed is that the tendency is to move the complexity to the frontend nowadays.

    For the sake of having a simple api, easy testable and fast... And cheap.

    Servers are costly, anyhow 99% of the users buy the new super powa device otherwise inbox or FB do not work.

    I am not saying that this is correct but is indeed the truth.

    That being said, try a run on a vuejs server side rendered app (nuxtjs wink wink) and then you will see if is slow :)
  • 0
    If you look at the trends last year. It seems to settle around the big 3, react, vue and angular.

    So it's actually not as bad anymore ;-)
  • 1
    While I absolutely agree with this thread and will happily pour gasoline on JS, in my current role I'm tired of...

    "JavaScript is hard to build with and maintain. Be sensible and write thousands of microservices in Java!"
  • 0
    @bittersweet The real skill is to understand when you need the screwdriver only or the entire toolbox.

    But sometimes starting with the toolbox for a small thing can help you later if the project get bigger and you already have everything you need
Add Comment