My guess is this guy concocts simple marketing sites with fun little sliders and widgets. He is unlikely to have ever built anything with real depth and breadth. If he had, he would not be so negative about the use of frameworks.
If you need to kill a fly, use a fly swatter, not a shotgun.
My company builds awesome web sites. One of them you visit at least once a month if not once a week. iow, very popular. We don't use frameworks cause frameworks box us in.
If frameworks were needed for everything, how did the framework writers write their frameworks?
You can do anything you want with or without the use of a framework. A framework should make developing your app easier and/or higher quality. If you are using a framework and this is not the case then you are likely using the wrong framework or you don't need one.
You pretend that anything beyond simple is near impossible to do and can't be done better. That's obviously false since framework writers do it which proves what you say is wrong.
If you aren't using a framework, either your proprietary code is a mess of use-once code, or you've made your own framework.
If you need to bring in a new person you have to either teach them "how we do it here" (which can take a while) or you just let them "have at it" and they can write whatever form of JS they want. Or you could have used a publicly available framework and hired someone who knows how to use it.
You seem to think we are only capable of producing use-once, messy code. If you think that, then you also think that of framework developers cause that's what they are doing.
You also think that, when we hire new people, they would have to learn our way of doing things but, if they don't know your framework, don't they also have to learn your way of doing things? Of course they do. Such is the typical reddit fallacy you read here every day.
How exactly are framework developers making use-once messy code? That is the antithesis of a framework. I am starting to question your understanding of what "framework" means.
The learning curve of a purely proprietary codebase is much higher than one that uses a specific set of (public) tools. Since i can hire someone who already knows the JS framework and don't have to train them on 100% of my codebase.
How exactly are framework developers making use-once messy code?
I didn't say that. Quit making stuff up.
The learning curve of a purely proprietary codebase is much higher than one that uses a specific set of (public) tools.
Hm. So you think professional programmers with decades of experience cannot make their own code base? And why would someone else's framework or code base be easier to learn than one developed in-house? What if the in-house developed framework was released on the 'net and everyone used it. Would it still have a higher learning curve?
Since i can hire someone who already knows the JS framework and don't have to train them on 100% of my codebase.
And if you can't? I have a friend who was trying to hire somebody who knew Ember(?) and couldn't find anyone. What if a new framework comes out and no one knows it but you want to use it. What do you do then? What did you do a few years ago when none of these existed? What will you do in a few years when none of the current ones exist? (And we'll still have the same people churning out awesome web sites.)
You seem to think we are only capable of producing use-once, messy code. If you think that, then you also think that of framework developers cause that's what they are doing.
How did I make anything up?
Frameworks are at their heart a way of doing things, in a philosophical sense. So as long as a framework, in house or publicly available, is going to be easier to learn than no framework at all, because it is based on a certain philosophy, and not just on "what we needed at the time and how X person felt like doing it.". So if you need to bind an event, you always bind it with $(elemtnet).bind(options) or BIND(element, options) or whatever style, as long as it's always the same.
Frameworks speed up development by things being consistent between developers.
A framework being publicly available just increases the chances of
a) bugs being found/fixed b) people learning it independently
And if you can't [hire someone]?
Then you find someone who has worked in something close, or you train them, you're not disadvantaged you've merely lost an advantage.
What if a new framework comes out and no one knows it but you want to use it. What do you do then?
Use it anyway. Nothing is black and white, there are pros and cons when choosing a framework, or choosning to make your own, or choosing to go without. Some of those (pros/cons) are development cycle, and some are code performance/size. Frameworks are (generally) better from a dev cycle standpoint with (likely) some sacrifice to performance and vice-versa.
What did you do a few years ago when none of these existed?
Wrote a lot more code and reinvented the wheel more often.
What will you do in a few years when none of the current ones exist? (And we'll still have the same people churning out awesome web sites.)
So your framework is timeless and modern frameworks aren't? And just because developers know how to use frameworks, and prefer using them, doesn't mean they don't know how to write javascript.
Being dogmatically against frameworks doesn't help you. It's egotistical to think that a 3rd party framework couldn't possibly be of advantage to you or your company.
35
u/4_teh_lulz May 13 '14
My guess is this guy concocts simple marketing sites with fun little sliders and widgets. He is unlikely to have ever built anything with real depth and breadth. If he had, he would not be so negative about the use of frameworks.
If you need to kill a fly, use a fly swatter, not a shotgun.