• P (unregistered)

    Remy, stop complaining about web development and JS like you know everything about it. There are more WTFs on this site about client/server applications than WTFs about front-end code and JS.

  • Ondřej Vágner (google)

    What? But... everyone must use frames! Don't you know that secure multi-mediation is the future of all webbing?

  • bvs23bkv33 (unregistered)

    i think web should be based on RPC

  • El Dorko (unregistered)

    TRWTF is web development.

  • my name is missing (unregistered)

    I continue to like Gecko not KHTML.

  • Reginald P. Smithington (unregistered) in reply to Ondřej Vágner

    Thank you for this.

  • medievalist (unregistered)

    I found this amazing new Javascript framework - all the fastest, most successful sites are using it now. It's the wave of the future, and it's already being used on more websites than jQuery, Prototype JS, MooTools, YUI, and Google Web Toolkit combined. Check it out at http://vanilla-js.com !

  • tbo (unregistered) in reply to medievalist


  • I am Mozilla (unregistered)

    That linked article about user strings is pretty funny

  • Klaus (unregistered)

    @medievalist I use vanilla.js all the time in my bookmarklets and user scripts. But somehow I suspect it doesn't handle cross-browser issues out of the box.

  • (nodebb)

    I am glad I am retiring in the near future (I am going to travel and take up gardening, leaving s/w engineering well behind me).

    I am also glad I am now relegated to working on services and other backend code now (my specialty used to be desktop apps in Swing, which while a mess, it isn't a steaming pile of mess).

    I take one look at Javascript and what is required to write the client layer for web clients and I shudder.

    Good luck to you guys.

  • sizer99 (google)

    The worst of it was CSS2 - CSS2 was an inconsistent, incompatible, incomplete hot mess. We'd go lay something out and it was just easier and more reliable to still use tables. Bam, done. But the CSS hipsters would sneer at that, because you're supposed to separate the content (HTML) from the layout (CSS), so they'd spend hours on every page fine-tuning the CSS with conditionals (Is this firefox? is this IE5? Is this IE6? Is this Chrome? Is this Safari?) till they had a perfect gem of a web page with the ugliest CSS you have ever seen. And if you had to change one thing on the page it would shatter and you'd have to laboriously rebuild the CSS. I suspect this is where the fad for 'modern' / 'reactive' UIs really came from - the simpler your page and the less content on it, the less monstrous your CSS would have to be.

    CSS3 fixed most of those issues, so it really is feasible to separate now without sacrificing goats, but for a while web dev was even worse than deciding which of 200 frameworks to use.

  • Christopher Best (google)

    A few years ago, James Mickens wrote a great article about this very thing.


  • I can be a robot if you want me to be (unregistered)

    Who would have thought that a platform for displaying static information would fail when trying to run fully featured applications?

  • Officer Johnny Holzkopf (unregistered)

    Is anyone here old enough to remember a time when you talked about "dynamic HTML" and had filenames ending in .dhtml, you actually used something called SSI (Server Side Include)?

  • Chris (unregistered) in reply to Christopher Best

    Tow a what all away?

  • alex (unregistered) in reply to Chris

    to wash it all away

  • Little Bobby Tables (unregistered) in reply to Christopher Best

    Some of the most appallingly overwritten prose and tedious lame unoriginal unjokes I've had the misfortune to read for a long time, but I ploughed through to the end to see if he had a point. TL;DR: apart from "I don't like javascript", he didn't.

  • Angela Anuszewski (google) in reply to Little Bobby Tables

    Yeah, more of a "soapbox" article than a CodeSOD.

  • Christopher Best (google) in reply to Little Bobby Tables

    Wow, why do you hate fun?

  • Little Bobby Tables (unregistered) in reply to Christopher Best

    Do you ask a gourmet chef who disdains fast food restaurants why he hates food?

  • Not-Your-Name (unregistered) in reply to Officer Johnny Holzkopf

    Yes. And I also wrote my Geocities web page in Notepad, "As It Should Have Been"

  • Diane B (unregistered) in reply to I am Mozilla

    That "funnay" article actually cleared up a lot for me.

  • Diane B (unregistered)

    At first I thought the WTF was going to be this but to your credit you ignored it completely and went to a much higher level:

    IE4 = (document.all) ? true : false;

  • (nodebb) in reply to Klaus

    Well, you could always try out one of the many Vanilla JS plugins...

Leave a comment on “And it was Uphill Both Ways”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article