PS: I'm currently hiring for developers with 3+ years of T3 experience.
1. http://reagent-project.github.io/
2. http://www.meetup.com/Reagent-Minimalistic-React-for-Clojure...
The web is still really young and the standard organizations are still figuring out what HTML / CSS / JS / etc… are all about.
And I'm totally fine with that, we live in such an exciting time. It's like being around when written language was invented. Except with computers.
* Is dogfooded for a real app by authors (muut.com
Discussion-as-a-Service)
* Is small (code size and file size)
* Is simple
* Avoids(?) being simplistic (too simple)
* Has an idea of components
I think polymer might be the closest alternative, but muut has a comparison that doesn't speak too well for polymer: https://muut.com/riotjs/compare.html
I don't think there's exactly one way of doing anything, there may be leaders in some spaces but I doubt any of them are considered holy grails. Pick the tool that best fits the problem at the time and don't wait for a potential holy grail in the future.
I gave up that hope. The holy grail seems to have been reached (and lost) with Smalltalk and its image-based introspective runtime.
Personally I'm glad that T3 released their framework - it doesn't harm me, after all, and they did all the work - but I think some people have unrealistic expectations on the value of code re-use. The problem is the economic incentives in the software market: chances are, if your problem is close enough to somebody else's problem that you can re-use the bulk of their UI code, your market is too undifferentiated for you to exist as a separate company. When frameworks do attain market success (eg. JQuery in 2006, when IE6 was the dominant browser, Firefox & Safari were brand new, and Chrome didn't exist), it's usually because the big company in charge of the overall platform has been asleep at the wheel, and then the need for a framework disappears once they get their act together and start moving the platform forward (eg. JQuery in 2014).
I'm curious as to why you think JQuery is a framework. From my view of things, it seems to be a library in all definitions I've encountered.
Just yesterday we had a meeting with the team at my company that's responsible for building the glue to allow our flagship product (~$4b profit per year) to be composed by independent releases created by independent teams that aren't always communicating on a regular basis. They built a library based on the whitepaper that was published by the main developer behind T3. At the time they started, there was nothing publicly available that served the need. But now, a company following in our footsteps will have T3 and won't have to waste the time that we did building it.
If you don't want to take the time to figure out if it will actually be useful for you, wait for early adopters to kick the tires, write blog posts, etc. Then if it gains enough critical mass, and it seems to solve your problem much better than how you previously did things, use it.
Do you really believe that the motive behind this charity is 100% altruistic?
Oh man, I gotta an ocean front house in Arizona to sell ya!
Joking aside, these people publishing and releasing these frameworks to the public at min looking for reciprocal treatment in terms of improvements to their product made by the community and the general adoption of it by wide segments of the community making it easier for them to recruit and integrate new team members with minimal costs in training and sunken costs.
So, this symbiotic relationship between us devs and these corporations is neither altruistic nor patrimonialistic
An open-source project is a burden, you probably won't gain anything from them, and will probably lose a lot of time. Almost all of my projects are OS, but I don't do it expecting people to come over and help (even if it is sure nice when they do).
I think the correct term you should use is Rockstar Ninja, but this might have changed, too.
"Furthermore, there's nothing preventing us from using Backbone, React or another framework in addition to T3, if we so desire."
PS nobody goes out and rewrites their app just because a new thing came along. This performative exasperation with the amount of options in JS-land is getting old really quick.
In your experience, you mean. Some of us have experienced exactly what you just described.
You should be one of these clueless HR managers (( 10+ years of jQuery Experience ))
- Hello, jQuery wasn't around 10 years ago ...
But seriously and with all due respect when will these people realize that the market for JS frameworks is INSANELY saturated and released products are ASTONISHINGLY optimized that there's no need for the time being to push yet another framework and torture us devs with the task to master it out of the fear of being left behind and feeling irrelevant skills-wise?
Probably when you realize that it's not a market.
Nobody sells you anything.
They offer it for free. Anybody who wants can use it, anybody who doesn't please don't let the door hit them on their way out.
Anybody who wants can use it, anybody who doesn't please don't let the door hit them on their way out.
I guess that you might know that we devs don't have the final say on all of this. Clients or employers dictate in one way or another the way to go with front end web dev. If it were for me and I guess many devs, we'd just settle for one or two frameworks max. and just ignore the rest and their existence.
It's tough market out there dude!
thatsthejoke.jpg