I didn’t read it as sarcasm. I read it as this: there’s a lot of cargo-culting going around in JavaScript land. When a new framework comes out, people rush to it like it will solve all of their problems. I’ve seen this personally with Angular, Ember, and now React. All too often the argument for using a framework is “X is new, and we want to be hip and on the cutting edge!” instead of “X solves our problems in a way that other approaches don’t.” That’s what the author is getting at here.
Honestly I thought this post was very thoughtfully written. I especially liked this part:
If you’ve seen a few JavaScript libraries, it’s not hard to understand everything in this example without any documentation. And usually with other frameworks, this is where the simplicity stops.
Framework designers, take note. Tutorials are good for getting started, but what we’d really like to see is how to solve real-world problems with your framework.
I think I speak for a lot of people (but maybe not everyone) when I say I have literally never done that. Not even the Python flatten-with-list-comprehensions idiom.
Sarcasm?
I didn’t read it as sarcasm. I read it as this: there’s a lot of cargo-culting going around in JavaScript land. When a new framework comes out, people rush to it like it will solve all of their problems. I’ve seen this personally with Angular, Ember, and now React. All too often the argument for using a framework is “X is new, and we want to be hip and on the cutting edge!” instead of “X solves our problems in a way that other approaches don’t.” That’s what the author is getting at here.
Honestly I thought this post was very thoughtfully written. I especially liked this part:
Framework designers, take note. Tutorials are good for getting started, but what we’d really like to see is how to solve real-world problems with your framework.
I think I speak for a lot of people (but maybe not everyone) when I say I have literally never done that. Not even the Python flatten-with-list-comprehensions idiom.