- Feature Articles
- CodeSOD
- Error'd
-
Forums
-
Other Articles
- Random Article
- Alex's Soapbox
- Announcements
- Best of…
- Best of Email
- Best of the Sidebar
- Bring Your Own Code
- Coded Smorgasbord
- Mandatory Fun Day
- Off Topic
- Representative Line
- News Roundup
- Editor's Soapbox
- Software on the Rocks
- Souvenir Potpourri
- Sponsor Post
- Tales from the Interview
- The Daily WTF: Live
- Virtudyne
Admin
Well, you could argue that this is a good way of taking an existing product (which works) and setting up the first version of a transfer to a new environment. See where you can improve it, surface the technical debt, and replace old code with new AngularJS code as required.
I doubt that's what happened, but it might have been the original intent. In which case I'll bet dollars to cents that the team told some PHB that it would cost $X to update it, and the PHB said "Why update it? It's working fine right now ..."
Admin
My favorite Javascript framework: http://vanilla-js.com/
Admin
You mean a reason that isn't "many JS developers are dedicated followers of fashion, always looking for new shiny"?
Admin
I mean, that's true too, but AngularJS had a lot of pain points and weird coupling because of its architecture. Its successor has a different set, mind you.
But I'm old and thing that the DOM is a terrible way to represent a non-document oriented interface.
Admin
Sounds like $scope could have used $listerine to disinfect.....
Admin
For a while, I resisted JQuery. Mostly because it was a fairly sizable library, and I only needed a few functions here and there. So hey, I can just implement those few functions myself, and I don't need JQuery.
And let me tell you, JQuery's element selector is so much better than using document.evaluate() for everything...
Admin
I see at least one extra benefit : super easy migration to angular / react / vue / whatever comes next !
Admin
Was it really cow-orkers who wanted to swap, or a CEO who had read in Forbes that it was the new shiny and the guaranteed way to get ahead?
Admin
Not to pick on @Steve but there's another good reason for
In a world with fast moving tech, zero job security, and gigs whose length is measured in months at most, one either keeps up with the new shiny or one quickly becomes unemployable except at the most backwards of WTF-heavy outfits.
The situation is utterly deplorable. But I can hardly fault decent people for frantically playing the game they find themselves trapped in.
Admin
That was my first thought--this was imposed from above.
Admin
Fair enough, but I can't shake the impression that it's deliberate pursuit of the new shiny rather than reluctant avoidance of the old shiny.
Or maybe I'm just living down to my forum handle...
Admin
Fair enough, but I can't shake the impression that it's deliberate pursuit of the new shiny rather than reluctant avoidance of the old shiny.
Or maybe I'm just living down to my forum handle...
Admin
Wow, that's like when Rick made that robot to pass the butter. Or when I used Internet Explorer to download Chrome.
Admin
@Mr. TA jQuery was awesome ten years ago because JavaScript really sucked and the DOM API really sucked and browser compatibility was a nightmare. But now vanilla JS is good and browsers are good and we can all use vanilla JS* and not hate it!
*Transpiled from Typescript and injected with polyfills, of course
Admin
I have the impression this is vastly more common than anyone sane would admit. But hey, apparently the unsane is me, who is going around by over three years by now
Admin
document.querySelector, document.getElementById
Why use a gigantic library which makes people produce unreadable script in the best of times, when the only good thing about it was that it made it easier to make sites to work on most browsers, back in the days before babel, and before most stuff works in all browsers anyway?