I was/am "doing" javascript (more or less) commercialy since 1999 (gasp!) but my core "skills" (whatever that means) are C++, Architecture, CTO ..
Since approx 2010, I was just more or less watching what is going on with JS explosion. And I have to say I consider my self really lucky I was not involved with proliferation of "frameworks" and "libraries". Full disclosure: I have official "thank you" from jQuery core team. A big gasp! :)
FFWD to 2019 Q2. I think I can see "coming back to senses" underground movement, inside this "front end bubble". (W3C stayed immune to the hype)
If I would have time to do any kind of a front end myself, I would not hesitate to use three ingredients only:
HTML, CSS and JavaScript.
For app logic and back end, use free web services (example: programmableweb.com/)
Ah, and yes, before all: Make sure you design you app before you code it.
ps: this is article from last year, I do not know how far have you got ...
You know, coming into this pretty much cold, I kind of thought I need to just stick to the core of what is there. As you said front end - HTML CSS and JavaScript. The accompanying shiny things, while great, perhaps would confuse what I need to know and even more importantly provide an unnecessarily complex solution where a simple one could have been built. Again - I have no idea what I'm talking about here. Just a hunch.
I'm getting there with the planning of what I want to do. As I progress, the plan changes and morphs (wait, I'm supposed to say 'pivot' aren't I? I know o souldn't be so irreverent, but hey, I'm Australian!! ) As the idea is actually defined at a technical level. It is tres exciting!
Oh and the JQuery thing. That's cool. Not that I'm envious. Of course.
So, can I say I know a guy that built the JQuery thing? Promise I won't make it bigger than it is (an Australian would never do that)
I am not "a guy that built the jQuery thing", that is John (Resig) :)
Those where the days when most of what is enjoyed today in every JS kindergarten, had to be built. That is Sizzle (sizzlejs.com/) the core selector engine. To be honest, the jquery forum doscussions have been so heated, I have not even noticed I am contributing to it. But it seems I was.
Today, I can see a lot of talent in (for examle) React. But I do not understand two things:
First, there is no single diagram, nothing, on the subject of architecture or design. That is a wider problem though.
Second, I do not understand how would I lead the team where CSS and JS roles are clearly defined and separated, while basing a code on (something like) React? It is no accident FaceBook pages are anything but "beautiful". Or even "visualy pleasing" like (for example) Bootstrap CSS, can do. CSS and JS projects, need to be able to work in parallel. And independently as much as possible.
But, as I said there is a lot of talent over there. Lady leader of React team goes on stage (2018,Aug) and says: "classes are bad". Just like that. After many years have been lost in figting against introducing them in JS. And voila, all of a sudden fully functional React component is not a class any more.
The point is: why should we care?
We perhaps should and could, if forced to make a decision. Until then enjoy the HTML+CSS+JS combo ..
I was being very cheeky about the JQuery thing. Now that you mention it, there is no diagram or even a written explanation of how there frameworks or libraries are built. In the broadcast world very old facilities have incomplete or inaccurate drawings indicating what goes where, and that is the end of the world when it come time to commission a large piece of infrastructure. Why on earth isn't there diagrams of what functions etc goes where? Is it a case of restricting knowledge? Surely that can't be the case, if people want their framework used. Also there seems to be no standard protocol when it comes to the instructions that do exist. By that I mean, there seems to be no thought gone into who reads these instructions: as long as the author understands, it's fine. And there's no structure to writing docs other than, getting started, doc's etc. That's it. As formal as it gets. Maybe this is an area that needs to be addressed...
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I was/am "doing" javascript (more or less) commercialy since 1999 (gasp!) but my core "skills" (whatever that means) are C++, Architecture, CTO ..
Since approx 2010, I was just more or less watching what is going on with JS explosion. And I have to say I consider my self really lucky I was not involved with proliferation of "frameworks" and "libraries". Full disclosure: I have official "thank you" from jQuery core team. A big gasp! :)
FFWD to 2019 Q2. I think I can see "coming back to senses" underground movement, inside this "front end bubble". (W3C stayed immune to the hype)
If I would have time to do any kind of a front end myself, I would not hesitate to use three ingredients only:
HTML, CSS and JavaScript.
For app logic and back end, use free web services (example: programmableweb.com/)
Ah, and yes, before all: Make sure you design you app before you code it.
ps: this is article from last year, I do not know how far have you got ...
Good luck...
You know, coming into this pretty much cold, I kind of thought I need to just stick to the core of what is there. As you said front end - HTML CSS and JavaScript. The accompanying shiny things, while great, perhaps would confuse what I need to know and even more importantly provide an unnecessarily complex solution where a simple one could have been built. Again - I have no idea what I'm talking about here. Just a hunch.
I'm getting there with the planning of what I want to do. As I progress, the plan changes and morphs (wait, I'm supposed to say 'pivot' aren't I? I know o souldn't be so irreverent, but hey, I'm Australian!! ) As the idea is actually defined at a technical level. It is tres exciting!
Oh and the JQuery thing. That's cool. Not that I'm envious. Of course.
So, can I say I know a guy that built the JQuery thing? Promise I won't make it bigger than it is (an Australian would never do that)
I am not "a guy that built the jQuery thing", that is John (Resig) :)
Those where the days when most of what is enjoyed today in every JS kindergarten, had to be built. That is Sizzle (sizzlejs.com/) the core selector engine. To be honest, the jquery forum doscussions have been so heated, I have not even noticed I am contributing to it. But it seems I was.
Today, I can see a lot of talent in (for examle) React. But I do not understand two things:
First, there is no single diagram, nothing, on the subject of architecture or design. That is a wider problem though.
Second, I do not understand how would I lead the team where CSS and JS roles are clearly defined and separated, while basing a code on (something like) React? It is no accident FaceBook pages are anything but "beautiful". Or even "visualy pleasing" like (for example) Bootstrap CSS, can do. CSS and JS projects, need to be able to work in parallel. And independently as much as possible.
But, as I said there is a lot of talent over there. Lady leader of React team goes on stage (2018,Aug) and says: "classes are bad". Just like that. After many years have been lost in figting against introducing them in JS. And voila, all of a sudden fully functional React component is not a class any more.
The point is: why should we care?
We perhaps should and could, if forced to make a decision. Until then enjoy the HTML+CSS+JS combo ..
I was being very cheeky about the JQuery thing. Now that you mention it, there is no diagram or even a written explanation of how there frameworks or libraries are built. In the broadcast world very old facilities have incomplete or inaccurate drawings indicating what goes where, and that is the end of the world when it come time to commission a large piece of infrastructure. Why on earth isn't there diagrams of what functions etc goes where? Is it a case of restricting knowledge? Surely that can't be the case, if people want their framework used. Also there seems to be no standard protocol when it comes to the instructions that do exist. By that I mean, there seems to be no thought gone into who reads these instructions: as long as the author understands, it's fine. And there's no structure to writing docs other than, getting started, doc's etc. That's it. As formal as it gets. Maybe this is an area that needs to be addressed...