There's so much amateur work and muddied merit-sense-making of what's good software, who to listen to, and how to move forward - my feeling is that pendulum is just about at peak.
There's so much amateur work and muddied merit-sense-making of what's good software, who to listen to, and how to move forward - my feeling is that pendulum is just about at peak.
Sure, you can install a bunch of deps for every small problem, but you don't have to.
If you just take a bit time to think, you can roll your own solution for 90% of the deps, which are tiny packages anyway.
I guess I was trying to approach a few concerns beyond just dependencies: learning curve, conventions/standards, framework volatility, and merit assess-ability of ideas.
The more people involved (popularity), the greater the difficulty to parse the merit of an idea without pre-existing competence. How easy is it for a new developer to find a cogent way of doing things in Javascript land compared to a smaller more specific ecosystem? In the smaller ecosystem the experts are easier to determine due to a smaller population, whereas in Javascript-land there's so many people, opinions, articles, and conventional disparities; a much more challenging exercise.
In JS people would install packages for every small problem they have.
Neither is good.
I always check if I can write it myself in reasonable time, if not, I install a package for it.
I'd install React, but I'd write the navigation myself.
I'd install a video-player, but I'd write a SVG animation myself.
etc.
I think if you saw a professional C++/C#/F#/LISP*/Clojure dev etc pulling in a dependency to do IsOdd you'd rightly laugh at them... Yet in JS, that just seems like an acceptable thing to do.
I don't understand why the standard is so low. Is it because of all these learn Javascript / Web development in 12 weeks bootcamps?