So far, the Infinite monkey theorem is just giving us an infinite number of javascript frameworks, and no Shakespeare
Moon's purpose is to provide an API similar to Vue, while being less than half of the size, and having improved performance in most cases. Why try and stop something new without giving any valid criticism? If we all have a mindset like this, the web isn't going to ever improve.
If you really want to improve the web, we're gonna need to think a bigger than this...
Moon has the core features of Vue, but it's started going in a different direction. I'd love any feedback and to hear your thoughts :)
Second, that reaction isn't about not wanting to "make decisions"... that simplifies a rather complex set of thoughts and beliefs that are driven by the often-comical Javascript world, which appears to favour extreme complexity, constant churn and obsolescence, a near-complete absence of standards or best practices, duplication of effort, and fragmentation. Of course, the flipside of this is rapid evolution, competition in a marketplace of ideas, etc, etc.
Third, if you don't want people to see this effort as yet-another-UI-framework, it'd probably be a good idea to position the project as something other than "everyone else's good ideas, but smaller and faster" (lightly paraphrasing from the project landing page)!
I am by no means trying to force people to use Moon. Instead, I am trying to show something that you might want to consider if you use and like Vue, as it is smaller and faster.
I agree I might need to reposition this project and state a little more. But I've already clarified why I made this in an article I wrote[1].
And, I should just point out: the original commenter, and myself, may have our... let's call it lack of patience with the JS community. But don't be discouraged by a little bitterness... as you mention in your blog post, there's definitely javascript library fatigue out there, and for good reason. But if the work is good, it'll speak for itself! Everything else is just marketing, and if you're not interested in pushing the project toward broader adoption, just keep on keeping on! Either people will use it or they won't, and either way you'll have learned a lot along the way, and there's nothing wrong with that.
Moon's goal isn't to have complete API compatibility with Vue, but instead to have a light alternative with a similar API.
These are hard decisions.
I don't understand the 'shit on something new because there are similar things' mentality. It is the antithesis of the hacker spirit.
The truth, with software, is you don't really know what the implications of a design change are until you use it. We know a lot about what's good and bad about React now because we used it for a ton of stuff. That's the equivalent of taking your test vehicle out on the roads and testing it. In order to do that testing, these things get posted on Hacker News. Making your library mostly error free, putting docs up on GitHub... That's just getting it ready to actually test the ideas in that library.
The JavaScript community is one of the most research friendly communities out there. That's because we basically don't have a standard library, we have to send our entire application over the wire in less than a second, we can't really change the runtime, and people often want us to build new applications in a matter of days.
I get it, there are other realms of software development where you just have standardized tools, where stability is supreme, where you want to write huge checks and get back predictable quantities of mostly error free software. I get that.
But this comment shitting on JavaScript for changing too much, it's like making fun of a kid for saying weird stuff. If you want something comprehensible and predictable, go use something else! Let things be what they are. Appreciate that we have choices and different languages have different goals. Don't beat the same drum over and over of "JavaScript is too JavaScripty!"
Reflect upon this comment for a moment.
What you just said is, if we want a comprehensible, predictable development ecosystem, we should just use something other than the web.
Do you understand why this rebuttal is a bit ridiculous?
So are you choosing not to reflect and respond to my comment? Or did you really just completely miss the point I made?
I'll look for the comment where I saw more details on this. Edit to add: I haven't been able to find the comment where this was mentioned. It was within the past couple of months, though.