Top unpopular opinion:
I can still be more productive and integrate web apps much faster when using vanilla JS and jQuery than literally ANY JS framework.
Top unpopular opinion 2:
People who only learn full-stack Javascript will have a biased vision on web development
Agreed, but it really depends on the project for me. If I start rendering a bunch of JSON lists I am not on board, but sometimes vanilla just makes things run faster. I was actually converting a vanilla ES6 app to Angular for a research team and noticed a bunch of choppy scrolling. Converted some Angular state management back to some simple DOM queries, and everything was back to normal. Something to be said for that!
Oh, but I won't touch JQuery with a ten foot pole. ES6 minus IE support all the way 😁
I do encourage you to check out Stimulus because it makes it so easy to ensure that your code is mutation-safe, but agree that vanilla really is the best flavor.
I feel you about the JS / jQuery debate, haha. I ship way faster too, that way. I do feel, however, that I am not improving myself, just repeating tricks. React / Vue force me to organise my code a bit better. Takes longer though, but might be better for scalability and all that.
I've been a professional C, Perl, PHP and Python developer.
I'm an ex-sysadmin from the late 20th century.
These days I do more Javascript and CSS and whatnot, and promote UX and accessibility.
I meant unpopular in the sense that everybody seems to favor using a framework now instead of also understanding that the basic principles still hold. And well honestly I'm trying to learn Svelte now and well I could embedded a Google maps map on a page in 5 minutes using JS for example but in Svelte there's some restrictions on how components are mounted, how files are defined, etc... I wonder if in the end for a similar result, the code won't end up being harder to work with
Silicon Forest Developer/hacker. I write about Generative AI, DevOps, and Linux mostly.
Once held the world record for being the youngest person alive.
I agree, depending on the project. It's pure engineering. You have to weigh the advantages of a framework vs the overhead. Folks love to trash jQuery but the simple fact is you can have a project that meets all of your objectives for performance, security, and features with vanilla and jQuery and not spend a ton of time developing it. The end result is a quickly developed quality product. I respect people willing to make a choice like that.
Number 2 especially. The nuts and bolts of http are not going anywhere and you need to get your hands dirtier with that stuff than backend javascript points you towards. Also, back end architecture is a thing for a reason and it's exposed in different ways by more traditional frameworks.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Top unpopular opinion:
I can still be more productive and integrate web apps much faster when using vanilla JS and jQuery than literally ANY JS framework.
Top unpopular opinion 2:
People who only learn full-stack Javascript will have a biased vision on web development
Agreed, but it really depends on the project for me. If I start rendering a bunch of JSON lists I am not on board, but sometimes vanilla just makes things run faster. I was actually converting a vanilla ES6 app to Angular for a research team and noticed a bunch of choppy scrolling. Converted some Angular state management back to some simple DOM queries, and everything was back to normal. Something to be said for that!
Oh, but I won't touch JQuery with a ten foot pole. ES6 minus IE support all the way 😁
You are 100% not crazy.
I do encourage you to check out Stimulus because it makes it so easy to ensure that your code is mutation-safe, but agree that vanilla really is the best flavor.
Stimulus is awesome!
I feel you about the JS / jQuery debate, haha. I ship way faster too, that way. I do feel, however, that I am not improving myself, just repeating tricks. React / Vue force me to organise my code a bit better. Takes longer though, but might be better for scalability and all that.
cheers to the first one!
I'm not sure either of those are unpopular:
It's definitely quicker and easier to do things without a framework up to a certain point, at least.
Anyone who only learns X is going to be at a disadvantage when they play with the other alphabet blocks.
I meant unpopular in the sense that everybody seems to favor using a framework now instead of also understanding that the basic principles still hold. And well honestly I'm trying to learn Svelte now and well I could embedded a Google maps map on a page in 5 minutes using JS for example but in Svelte there's some restrictions on how components are mounted, how files are defined, etc... I wonder if in the end for a similar result, the code won't end up being harder to work with
I agree, depending on the project. It's pure engineering. You have to weigh the advantages of a framework vs the overhead. Folks love to trash jQuery but the simple fact is you can have a project that meets all of your objectives for performance, security, and features with vanilla and jQuery and not spend a ton of time developing it. The end result is a quickly developed quality product. I respect people willing to make a choice like that.
Number 2 especially. The nuts and bolts of http are not going anywhere and you need to get your hands dirtier with that stuff than backend javascript points you towards. Also, back end architecture is a thing for a reason and it's exposed in different ways by more traditional frameworks.