SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Depending on who you ask, right now JavaScript is either turning into a modern, reliable language, or a bloated, overly complex dependency hell. Or maybe both?
What's more, there's just so many options: Do you use React or Angular 2? Do you really need Webpack? And what's this month's recommended way of dealing with CSS?
Like you, I spent far too many hours reading about all this, and at the end I still wasn't sure. So I decided to create a survey to see what everybody else thought. It seems like I must've hit a nerve, because I got over 9000 answers in just over two weeks!
Further down in the article, the survey results are listed, though not in an easily scrape-able format. Oddly enough, the site degrades gracefully, and does not require Javascript to be enabled.
http://stateofjs.com/2016/introduction/
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 5, Insightful) by LoRdTAW on Tuesday October 11 2016, @01:38PM
The idea of JS isn't insane. Dynamic client side stuff is somewhat necessary like changing a displayed number without having to reload the entire page. But the problem I have with it is that JS should have no access outside of the page content itself. It should never have any ability to manipulate the browser window, open new windows, or access the file system save for presenting a file link to download. Half of the bullshit is because web browser devs are brain damaged and think things like dialogue boxes that keep tabs open in an infinite loop are acceptable(Google fixed this major fuck up in chrome only recently). Pop-unders/overs are enabled by the same brain dead design.
These horrible design decisions are due to the fact that people are trying to make the browser an OS or VM. It's absurd. You might as well make a word processor into an OS. That's all a web browser was ever supposed to be, display a page of text and pictures. Now its a media player, gaming platform, and emulator for whatever can be compiled into JS. Stop the madness.
(Score: 1) by shrewdsheep on Tuesday October 11 2016, @03:22PM
We have come round full circle indeed. You can develop webapps using the traditional desktop model by now (event loop, oo-widget hierarchy, etc.). E.g. http://www.cappuccino-project.org/ [cappuccino-project.org] (mostly) re-implements the Apple cocoa API. As browser/Javascript is the only true cross-platform solution at the moment this is a justification for that development model (and so called JS bloat) IMO.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by LoRdTAW on Tuesday October 11 2016, @04:41PM
I get the cross platform part. But hammering the square peg in the round hole is what modern web design is all about. There are better ways to do this. If you want a VM/OS then build one. Don't take a text/graphics layout engine and bolt on run times with hooks into the OS. It's dangerous, backwards thinking.
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Tuesday October 11 2016, @11:13PM
If you want a VM/OS then build one.
That would have the side effect of requiring many of your users to purchase a second device with which to use your VM/OS. Apple has made the business decision to make Cocoa Touch and WebKit JavaScript the only allowed APIs on iOS, because of past bad experiences with Java and ActionScript VMs.
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Wednesday October 12 2016, @12:40PM
A VM or OS does not require a second device. If you want a good design of what a mobile OS/ desktop application should look like have a look at the inferno architecture developed at Bell Labs. http://www.vitanuova.com/inferno/ [vitanuova.com]
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Thursday October 13 2016, @02:57AM
A VM or OS does not require a second device.
It does if the maker of the device you already own has locked out VMs and other OSes, enforcing this with strict W^X and cryptography. Notice that iOS isn't listed under "Host Operating Systems" on the Inferno page you linked. And does "Linux" refer only to GNU/Linux or also to Android?
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Thursday October 13 2016, @11:48AM
My point is not to hammer that functionality into an existing crap platform. The idea is to start fresh with a proper design. That was my point all along.
(Score: 2) by Pino P on Thursday October 13 2016, @12:30PM
Because of digital restrictions management, a user's paid apps, books, and videos will be incompatible with "a proper design". This means that after buying your "proper design", the user will still have to carry his existing device in order to retain access.
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Thursday October 13 2016, @04:03PM
Things I speak of are theory. We can't easily make a better system because of momentum. But I wont let that stop me from exploring those avenues and looking at other platforms or dedicating time to them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 11 2016, @04:10PM
You might as well make a word processor into an OS.
AKA emacs.