I have never used Redux, even after using React for 2+ years.
What's your unpopular opinion or something you?
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
I have never used Redux, even after using React for 2+ years.
What's your unpopular opinion or something you?
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
Latest comments (65)
100%, unfortunately that language isn't ready yet.
"Good" code is not elegant or clean, and it's never DRY.
Code coverage is a terrible metric, and unit tests are usually a waste of time
It's NOT okay to be soft.
I'm actually publishing a post about it tomorrow. Stay tuned.
Hahahaha agreed!
Absolutely! This has been true for me as a TypeScript developer.
I'm going to throw in a suggestion for ReasonML on this one. TS and Flow are great for many reasons, but ReasonML is just 100% better in every way. Compiles to JS and native, and has solid web frameworks in the ecosystem. Can't really go wrong.
Classes are the worst thing has ever happened to Javascript
That is a very popular opinion.
I tend to agree. It's nice to have "class" syntax if classes are what you actually want... But a lot of old-school devs saw that and said, "Oh, I guess we can do real OOP in JS now..." And JS is just fundamentally not object-oriented in the way that C# or Java are. It's silly to force that paradigm on a language that does so much more...
Is that assuming the strong-typed language compiles to Javascript? What about the cases where the target is a browser?
It's better to write dirty, understandable code than highly abstract and incomprehensible one.
Also, sometimes it's better to repeat some code rather than refactoring a days work just for the sake of "cleanness".
I would say it's almost always better to repeat code.
I repeat this regularly at work. We have a developer who (in PL/SQL) wrote a parameter as "parameter := null" instead of "parameter default null", and the reason was that "I'm not a typist".