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 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...