"I have learned 679 ways to render HTML. At least once or twice a year, I learn a new way to render HTML and at least 2.3 frameworks to help me on this journey."

This is from an article that popped up in my news feed yesterday. It's quite cynical and shouldn't be taken too seriously, but this HTML-part struck in an odd way.

All this fucking technology BS just to spew out some good old HTML.

I am sad now.

(href: https://blog.logrocket.com/develope...)

  • 1
    I guess that's one way to look at it but a lot of these things are applications in the browser and that's where the complexity comes into it.

    If we simplify it as "all just to display html"... you could wrap all the back end options, servers... into this too... but you don't have to pick all the back end options, servers... anymore than you have to pick all the front end ones too....

    If all you want is display HTML you can, pretty easily.

    If you want more ... then you've got some decisions to make.
  • 3
    I don’t quite get this type of complaint.

    It’s like saying ”there are too many types of sneakers!” No one is forcing you to switch.

    Options are good ... but they are often otional.

    It’s not anyone broke serverside rendering and forced you to use HAML or XAML. Just go with what you’ve always used.
  • 1
    I've been saying for a loooong time that pretty much all frameworks are trash and that I can accomplish the same thing in an hour using less than 500 lines of CSS and at a size of about 10kb vs 700kb for a framework.

    Frameworks are for people that found HTML/CSS just too difficult.
Add Comment