26
vanillaDev
138d

I got tired of relearning JavaScript frameworks and instead tried to escape their clutches.

Most of my developer life I've spent relearning how to do the same thing in a different framework.

And every three or four years its the same story, figure out templating, figure out building, complain on github bugs etc.

I am trying to reduce framework fatigue by allowing you to think "can I make my application with just vanilla JavaScript". The advantage of vanilla JavaScript is it write once - do not need to rewrite.

Do YOU think I will abandon ship and end up having to use a framework again?

Comments
  • 11
    Reason 1642 why i don't use Javascript
  • 1
    try finding a language that transpiles to javascript or WASM instead.
  • 2
    @jonas-w the 1641 reasons, repeated
  • 3
    I am jumping ship to wasm with Golang. If it doesn't work well I'll go for blazor.
  • 2
    @ars1 Go as wasm requires a 2 MB runtime. Not sure that's an improvement
  • 3
    Exactly. I've stopped learning frameworks [not libraries though] years ago. I live a better life now. I hope you'll get there too!
  • 3
    @tosensei Would that actually help with not having to change code every 3-4 years though? I'm legit asking cause I don't do it myself - I just imagine that if you tried to do everything, including clientside DOM manipulation, via a transpiled language - wouldn't some of that language's DOM API:s also change on occasion?
  • 4
    I'm a fan of vanilla, and it works great for small projects. But if you have a huge project with a long life - you often end up creating helpers similar to a lib or framework, and in the end you feel like rewriting everything every 3-4 years.

    Imagine if you had written a vanilla JS frontend 15 years ago, and kept it going until today. You would likely have written your own underscore/jQuery-like libs for stuff like network calls, DOM, arrays etc - and most of that would've been scrapped or rewritten after ES5.
  • 7
    You should get into React, that way you'll be relearning to do the same thing in the SAME framework every six months.
  • 2
    @MM83 That's even less comforting.
  • 2
    I'm seeing more and more people think like they way you seem to be. I totally agree with you. Having to re learn something can get tiresome.

    In an ideal world the language/framework would solve a problem and then that would be finished. Next problem please.

    I have a Laravel background and that changes a lot and most of the time, I can't see what the point was e.g. syntax or function name change but it still works the same way to the user. Why?
  • 0
    @Polymorphism it could be improved via transparent communication between userbase and developer, especially when refactoring happens (since it's less obvious for user). It's an utopia, though. :(
  • 0
    @Ikaroz C# is difficult and tbh I feel like a lot of that is because of the design choices MS made. New job without knowing any Java and a month in there are 99 problems but my Java skills ain't one. I doubt that would have been the case if I was coming from Java to C# tbh, even if I find erasure a bit problematic
  • 0
    @12bitfloat just put it on brotli. Getting rid of JS is enough of a payoff.
  • 2
    @ars1 Rust wants to have word

    (or my language that's not yet released)
  • 0
    @jiraTicket well, everything breaks _eventually_ if you wait long enough. but with transpiling, you can pick a language/framework-combo that has a.... _less volatile_ lifecycle than the cornucopia of dependency hell that is javascript.

    and since most other languages/frameworks (i have experience with) have a clearer upgrade path, it's easier to fix stuff when it breaks.
  • 1
    Hey guys I'm actually trying to make some long term bullet proof examples on vanilla apps: would love your thoughts:

    https://youtube.com/watch/...
  • 1
    @MM83 hhahahaha THIS is SO true!!
  • 0
    Im also annoyed about having to relearn vitest vs jest
Add Comment