There is no need to always create an "opposite"-view post in response to other "controversial" posts.
Can't wait for "The Pragmatic Front-End Developer" to pop-up in a few days.
Bottom line, we should focus on discussion that progresses our craft and not superficial rivalries. Take for example the excellent Pure UI by rauchg [1] (at the very least check the first footnote of the article, a true engineer in mind)
Yesterday, when The Boring Front-end Developer was posted, the top commentary[1] seemed generally critical of the change-averse attitude. The TL;DR was "this is technology industry, new stuff is good. Get used to it."
Front-end code preprocessors, recent build systems and package managers, new-age frameworks (Angular), "Universal JS", and SPAs would all fit into this category.
Some tend to be skeptical, some are evangelists. There is a line in the sand, and while most developers don't fall clearly on either side, taken in aggregate, the line is visible.
I quite liked the BFED post. However, I submitted this because I think it makes persuasive counter-points.
Given the negative tone yesterday, I thought the crowd here might be more receptive to the more forward-thinking mindset. What's fascinating to me is that, even with nearly directly opposing viewpoints, the commentary on both HN discussion threads is actually quite critical.
Every time a popular opinion blog comes around that has an opposing opinion come out, I always wonder if these archetypes do actually help to advance the field they're talking about. Meaning, I do actually find it helpful to read about how people are defining their value while performing their skill. Does anyone else find these opposing opinions helpful or do you just see them as wasteful drivel?
Granted, this is just a blog post, so the author isn't probably isn't actively trying to craft a faction amongst front end developers.
I feel I keep seeing an increasing number of blog posts that can be summarized as one of the following:
- Programming language X is dead/dumb/old/verbose, program in my own personal language Y.
- The [interpreter/compiler] for language Y is written in the source language, how "meta" is that?
- The library that will change the industry, and I just wrote it! <showcases a 5-10 line wrapper around a native language feature>
- I just invented this programming technique! <The technique has been in use since the early days of C>
Ultimately, I think it's the intention of those individuals to establish themselves in their selected niche -- and there's no problem with that, we all have to make a living. With social media and the associated disconnects, there seems to be a continuous drive to have one's voice/opinion be heard. In my own experience, I find the number of opinions floating around (either opposing or not) to simply increase the overall noise of the internet, especially those that assert their opinion on the reader. Consequently, this discourages me from sharing my own neutral insights on existing language features, technologies, or simply something new I learned.
On the note of establishing oneself, I believe the most effective method of doing so is the ability to showcase what one has accomplished, not just what one has said. Software development, companies, projects; the one purpose these three share in common is to solve the problems we're faced with. Whether that problem is solved with a game to satisfy one's boredom waiting at a bus stop, a usable ui design for booking flights, or writing a program that will take images of far off space bodies is beside the point -- the solutions we create will define our professional careers.
I'm glad you brought this up. I think it is generally difficult to come up with enough value on top of "hmm, this is a thought-provoking conversation and I'm glad it is being discussed" to be worth commenting, so comments vehemently agreeing or disagreeing end up being more common, and it is tempting to view the distribution of comments as being representative of the distribution of viewpoints. In reality, I suspect most people are like you (and me), and find that reading different viewpoints on a subject helps them solidify their own thoughts.
So yeah, I'm at least with you on finding this particular conversation useful and not at all wasteful drivel.
I find it useful. Individuals are very bad at being balanced. Seeing two opposed viewpoints and weighing them up for myself gives me a better basis for making decisions.
Indeed, some the most beneficial exchanges to observe are outright arguments.[1] When no one disagrees, no idea is truly tested.
This reminds me of pg's "What you can't say" essay[2]. We may be able to identify areas we are wrong by evaluating the topics on which we are most unlikely to allow dissent.
Nah, some individuals are pretty good at being balanced. Such individuals are unremarkable and not very vocal, and so you never pay attention to them on the Internet.
If you want balance, you need to seek it out, both consciously asking people with measured responses what they mean and discounting people who hold extreme viewpoints.
I've worked with teams that would read things like this and really take it to heart, while I've been part of teams that don't bother with it. Let's just say the latter of the two is much better to work with.
It seems like very legitimate, high preforming, teams aren't really drawn to things like this. In some ways they're BFED and in some they're CFED.
Somebody needs to concentrate on the boring stuff... in particular, making sure all the stuff on npm etc actually works...
The few times I try and use "hipster stuff", like yeoman generators, they don't really work out the box, and it feels like I could have spent that time manually getting things working, also a lot of complexity is added.
In a similar way, the churn rate of JS libs is just absolutely insane.
He forgot the part about jumping on every new JS library bandwagon when its still in beta and impressing all his friends with a new framework nobody has heard of.
Your comment just reads as "I've been using MooTools since my pappy was alive! It works so why change it."
If you want to stagnate and use the same tools, go for it. Other people will continue to push the envelope and improve the day to day lives of thousands of programmers everywhere.
If people were afraid to try new things, we wouldn't have things like Ember, or React, or Meteor, or Mythril, or Rails. You don't have to try every single thing that comes out, but at least be aware of them, and give them a cursory 30 minutes glance. You like programming, I assume? This should be fun, and it is!
>> If people were afraid to try new things, we wouldn't have things like Ember, or React, or Meteor, or Mythril, or Rails.
Or washing machines. Or cars. Or penicillin.
The anti-innovation mindset that pervades in this industry just baffles me. Sure, don't rewrite the accounting system every time a new framework comes out, but don't knock those forging the future either. (I know you weren't, I'm adding to your reaction to the parent.)
> The anti-innovation mindset that pervades in this industry just baffles me.
Developers in the industry are often in the business of selling their experience with particular technologies. New technologies becoming popular reduces the market value of that experience. The "anti-innovation" mindset -- and more specifically the public dismissal of new alternatives -- is often simple self-interested marketing.
There's not a problem with trying to build new things, quite the opposite. The problem is not so much with the creators but with the adoptees. Just because you're using something "new", that does not give you the right to say that whatever else someone is using that's not what you are using, shit. That and writing bullshit comparison articles between X and Y and proclaiming that X is amazing and you are lame and outdated if you are still using Y. If there's a profession that's as full of posers and hipsters this has to be it.
>> Your comment just reads as "I've been using MooTools since my pappy was alive! It works so why change it."
I didn't mean it to read like that - I'm not against new frameworks, just developers who jump on them and think they are the greatest thing since sliced bread before they're really vetted and most of the bugs have been worked out.
One thing the "boring/cool" divide doesn't capture is that a certain amount of the so-called cool kid shit involves an attempt to revive computing ideas that are about 50 years old.
I for one, find the lengths people go to seem unique incredibly hilarious, it takes a special kind of person to call himself a lover of a programming language.
Can't wait for "The Pragmatic Front-End Developer" to pop-up in a few days.
Bottom line, we should focus on discussion that progresses our craft and not superficial rivalries. Take for example the excellent Pure UI by rauchg [1] (at the very least check the first footnote of the article, a true engineer in mind)
[1]: http://rauchg.com/2015/pure-ui