Hacker News Reader

Comment by Dude2023 | Hacker News Reader

Dude2023

A required thought-piece for all JavaScript devs. Enjoy monopoly while it lasts, but be humble.

Fortunately JavaScript doesn't have the problem described by the OP:

"With a secret weapon like Lisp in my arsenal in 1986 I could blow my competition out of the water with one hand tied behind my back and holding a martini in the other."

A present-day JavaScript practitioner will have his left hand busy trying to figure out what's this week's fashionable way to pass around some data in this month's fashionable framework and his right hand busy trying to make npm and Webpack work, leaving no time for martinis or blowing anyone out of the water.

> leaving no time for martinis or blowing anyone out of the water.

Very true. Working with Javascript these days feels like jumping from one hoop to another with rarely getting any work done.

I disagree. It is true that many Javascript developers lack the formal CS education, but since it is the de facto language of the web with relatively lower barrier of entry, there are many people working on great projects. NPM is the largest package registry in the world, and whenever working on a project I find that I can solve most of the mini problems with a quick search. Jumping from framework to framework without really understanding the underlying technologies/thinking is a problem that should not be attributed to language itself, but to some of its users.

Although this low barrier of entry sometimes lead the users of the language to bad results, I especially like Javascript because of its welcoming nature. One can even argue that it democratises the software creation process on Earth by allowing anyone to quickly start tinkering with it and see the results immediately, most likely in a web environment.

Also, although it definitely has some quirks and may cause some frustration to starters, it also allows an experienced developer to be expressive and quickly build products, and may allow its users to enjoy their martinis.

JavaScript is for HN what sex is for highscool : those who talk the most about it are those who practise it the less.

If JS devs were not able to focus on bringing value they wouldn't be able to hold jobs, build products nor profitable companies. If JS was so impratical there would not be so many people choosing it over various alternatives for building GUIs, games, websites, WebGL/WebVR, back-end services and so on.

If there is a warning in this story, it is a warning to people looking down on rising languages and frameworks. Those are the people risking to become irrelevant because of a mix of smugness, gatekeeping and ivory tower syndrome.

This attitude is exactly what lost Ron Garret when C++ and Java happened. This also prevented him to see (before the very end of his programming career) that the competition was actually doing just fine with the new tech. You and grand-parent totally missed the point of this story.

PS: You don't make npm "work"

JavaScript is for HN what sex is for highscool : those who talk the most about it are those who practise it the less.

I was using JavaScript professionally in 1999 and still write it almost every day. Not sure what that makes of your sex analogy: maybe I'm the middle aged guy who goes "free love used to be much better in my day"?

You probably know what I meant by "make npm work" — dealing with the messy dependency ecosystem and the less than ideal tooling.

I concede that I know what you meant by "make npm work" but I am sorry to hear that you have your left hand busy trying to figure out what's this week's fashionable way to pass around some data in this month's fashionable framework and your right hand busy trying to make npm and Webpack work.

More than 18 years of it must have been such a chore. I am glad this is not how either my coworkers or I spend our time using JavaScript professionally. Maybe I am very lucky, or maybe I just can spot a stereotype when I read one.

More seriously if you still use JavaScript after all those years that very likely proves the point that you can actually be productive with it.

Yes, you can be productive in JavaScript. But it’s not a magic bullet like Lisp supposedly was for the OP’s author in 1986.

I find I’m roughly as productive in JavaScript as in C. Webpack feels more complex than CMake. That’s a rather low bar for productivity.

> You don't make npm "work"

Maybe not, but I did spend a whole day trying to get a Polymer example work at all.

Of course one should be humble and seek for ways it improve. There are different languages/tools suited for different needs. But, I do not understand why do you think this piece should be a required read for Javascript devs. AFAIK, neither Lisp had a monopoly, nor Javascript does have one. It probably just has the largest user base.

In my view, users of different languages might benefit from this piece as much as JS devs. This behavior against JS devs cause unnecessary hostility.

In addition, Javascript may actually be "too big to fail", and it is actually in a very different state than Common Lisp in this sense. What I mean by that is being "the language" that is used in browsers and having the largest registry (npm).

I am not trying to attack, just curious about why do you think it specifically applies to JS devs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com