Our great sponsors
-
-
paper.js
The Swiss Army Knife of Vector Graphics Scripting – Scriptographer ported to JavaScript and the browser, using HTML5 Canvas. Created by @lehni & @puckey
-
SurveyJS
Open-Source JSON Form Builder to Create Dynamic Forms Right in Your App. With SurveyJS form UI libraries, you can build and style forms in a fully-integrated drag & drop form builder, render them in your JS app, and store form submission data in any backend, inc. PHP, ASP.NET Core, and Node.js.
I always wonder if modern React/Angular/Vue/Svelte developers never learned about the incredible timesaver known as Emmet :) https://emmet.io/
> <p>Oh yeah, you reminded me of the template fatigue that was paper.js and it trying to reinvent scripting on the client side with <script type="text/paperscript"> templates that could use templates that could use templates... and so on. [0] I was wondering why people would go to such great lengths just to avoid having to script in the browser.<p>The way I saw it at the time was that I've rediscovered the same mistakes that PHP did back in the days. All the recurs(iv)ed templating problems, all the OOP fatigue that never worked out (magento and zend, anyone?), and all the inheritance based "reinventions" of existing web technologies like OOCSS [1].<p>I mean, at some point every engineer should be wise enough to give up on trying to predict the future. Especially in projects they cannot predict what features are going to be implemented, so I'd naturally assume that modularity and compositional or entity/component aspects will win in later revisions or refactor decisions. But I was wrong with that assumption, I guess :S<p>I also can kinda understand the general bias towards closure among functional folks. I guess that lots of people at the time (or nowadays) had high hopes for it allowing to go more "functional" in its approach, allowing compositional patterns to be useful on the web. But, honestly, JS itself is so flexible and can be used in all kinds of architectural patterns that I think closure's purpose is kind of void by its own concept.<p>When comparing closure with, say, typescript (which I also don't agree with, because "string" and "String" and "any" are pointless from any language design perspective): Typescript at least has the benefit of typed API docs and good IDE integrations (due to LSP) that can be used in large teams to reduce the overhead of getting started with working on foreignly-owned code - whereas closure doesn't have any unique selling point in my opinion. I mean, even scala.js has a unique selling point when being judged like that.<p>[0] <a href="https://github.com/paperjs/paper.js" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/paperjs/paper.js</a><p>[1] <a href="http://oocss.org/" rel="nofollow">http://oocss.org/</a>
https://example.com" rel="noopener noreferrer">see my example
I feel that HTML grew way out of control to be used directly - it's absolutely unreadable and refactoring quickly becomes a huge danger zone even with brilliant existing tools. With IDE watcher tools you can easily setup automated previews to be rendered along side the files you're working on which imho is the way to go when directly working with HTML these days.
1 - https://github.com/Granitosaurus/shortcoder