This says more about the culture behind web development. A lot of people haven't learnt why complexity is bad, and so you get this situation where systems are intentionally made more complicated than they need to be.
no my dude, literally everyone knows why complexity is bad lol All these tools were made for a reason, and you don't even need all of this to have dynamic html to begin with. Just use petite vue, put a single script tag on the header and youre good to go
I think I can see two sides to this. Web development has gotten very complex. On the other hand a video like this (While def funny Chris) isn't using these tools for what they were built for. Large projects with multiple developers.
I actually refreshed the page just to confirm it wasnt some sort of audio-video glitch. I havent been this pleasantly surprised in a while - as a software dev and a 90s music fan, this is possibly best BGM to code with. Well played Mr Hawkes, well played.
One would like to start simple and keep it growing as needed. Web develepment nowadays is like: install, configure and deploy everything I will need in the next 10 years, just in case
the difference is current server side rendering works together with the client side code so once you can continue using the routes and stuff i have used vanilla js and server rendered html together for years and years and yes its better now
Having complexity at both client and server ends is an unstable state. I think ultimately all the complexity will shift to the server side, and the client will just turn into the equivalent of a dumb terminal.
I think the problem is too many dependencies. Unfortunately working in teams leans toward using frameworks to keep coding following a convention, but really we should be trying to get as vanilla as possible these days.
Lit element is the way to stay vanilla as it just creates native web components. This whole video seems to be about making it as hard to use as possible
@@overbyte using things like decorators means using babel and using babel means having a toolchain. Vanilla requires none of this. It might not be the fastest solution, but the majority of what lit provides can be done with pure CSS and pure JS with no pre-processing needed.
web dev is basically just building one of those model kits. most pieces are already made, you just need to glue it together then give it a nice coat of paint (css).
There has been this idea for a while that the developer community doubles about every 5 years. That given about half the developers out there are new with less than 5 years of experience. Imagine that this reality states more than half the developers out there came into this environment only knowing about JavaScript frameworks and not ever being exposed to the idea of just starting with an empty folder and adding just an index.html, styles.css, and a scripts.js to build an app. We have definitely jumped the shark in the webdev space and should probably take a critical look at our practices and see where some balance can come back. Simplicity isn’t a bad thing.
Would you expect a mobile app to be developed in 3 files? Or a rest API? Webdev is becoming more mature and catching up to backend with better tooling and build systems, things like static types. I've worked on many garbage 3-file web apps back in the day and it was a mess of css either orphaned or bleeding into unwanted elements, copy-pasted html all over the place, and horrible pre-es6 JavaScript that lived in callback hell. Anyone who thinks what we had back in the day was "simpler" is either misremembering or only did simple hello world applications.
@@avoerman89 Starting out simplr and then building on top of it as and when your project becomes complex is what OP is referring. Like you first teach how to compile manually using gcc and flags and stuff, and then move onto build systems like CMake once you start to get whats going on and the upward steps continue.
I agree with you. What i'm afraid of is the plethora of those "bootcamps", promising you to become a web developper in 1to 6 months (don't know for the rest of the world, but here, in France, they're everywhere). You end up with peoples who only knows React, unable to do VanillaJS, or understanding client/server architecture. Will those people suceed in their careers ? I think so, if they are willing to learn. But it's like learning to run before walking. You got to know the basics.
I just graduated with my CS degree and got an offer for a software engineering position, after seeing this, the question is: why the hell would I ever want to touch front end development?
I just got my first job as a web developer simply by being self taught. they code in react js next js with tailwind css. I was lucky because these are the frameworks I taught myself. Its crazy but im sure being a jr web dev they dont expect to much from you. Im just hoping I dont run into any crazy configs or things like that. I am nervous my first day is this wed LOL
I really like JavaScript, but this is partially why I refocused my efforts from web development to learning SQL, Python, and database development (that, and I have a potential job opportunity as a SQL dev). I’ll always enjoy doing web design in my free time, but I’m really enjoying learning database development, and it just seems like less of a headache to learn so far. I just realized that I’d rather continue learning and doing web development stuff in my free time rather than doing it as a career. That being said, I still recommend learning how to code by starting with web development.
your "plain html + css + javascript" is unmaintainable after a few weeks in, not to speak that most of the tools you configured by hand already come pre configured in most frameworks. Also, the tools you configured for the "madness" are toold that HELP you make your code better. Typescript helps you find bugs before you even start the app. Babel helps your javascipt be compatible across way more devices. Webpack/rollup/etc is used to tree shake and lower your bundle size. SASS helps you write better CSS, it has a lot of useful stuff like inheritance. Also why did you even configure webpack by hand? And then you go and claim "plain html" is way simpler... well yes if all you're doing is a simple homepage. No one in their right mind would make a web app in plain javascript nowadays, that's insanity and asking for your project to grow technical debt. You could have made a point about the web being bloated without having been so dishonest. This video felt like that meme image about sticking a stick on your own bycicle wheel and then blaming something else.
I think you are missing his point. Yes there are cases when complexity and boilerplates help do things faster BUT a lot of cases do not require this level of complexity and we have gone way too far in one direction. Not everyone is building the next facebook or whatever. Create React App type stuff is way over engineered for basic use cases and thats the point he is making. A lot of new devs don't even understand how to write a basic HTML with some JS sprinkled in (which can serve lot of real world use cases).
One of the things that impressed me most when I moved from desktop (WinForms) development to react was the huge size of the application folder with `node_modules` installed.
ikr, and those are minified files...text files. Text takes up so little space, so to pile up gigabytes of it each dependency needs to have thousands of SLOC. I don't remember the exact size but vibe-d (a D web server and web framework) takes up only a few megabytes. I have no idea wtf JS Devs are doing anymore
haha, when I started this video I figured had a 50/50 chance of going either way: this was either going to be a "look how fast I made a complex site with these tools. Awesome!" or "look how ridiculously long it takes to just get everything set up. this is a living nightmare."
Now generate multiple of these from a list of links returned by an api. Now html and pure js is a pain isn't it? You can have that without all that setup with petite vue for example. Web development has an entire range of complexity for you to choose from, analyse the trade offs and choose one which is more valuable for your goals
@@gamerzero6085 const res = await fetch('/api/links') const links = await res.json() document.querySelector('.js-link-list').innerHTML = links.map(({ href, label }) => ` ${label} `) No dependencies, no bundle, 1000x faster than React. Yes it isn't scalable but within the context of the topic it proves my point. React version: import React from 'react' import ReactDOM from 'react-dom' const Item = ({ href, label }) => ( {label} ) const App = () => { const [links, setLinks] = React.useState([]) React.useEffect(async () => { const res = await fetch('/api/list') setLinks(await res.json()) }, []) } return ( { links.map((link, idx) => ) } ) } ReactDOM.render(, document.getElementById('root')) Well... that's like 4x longer than the vanilla version and requires you to know the intricacies of the react lifecycle.
Yeah... so a few years ago everybody was bashing jQuery, saying it creates spaghetti code and we have to get rid of it. Now, if that was spaghetti, then what the hell is this React/Webpack stuff? Honestly, with jQuery I can actually code faster overall, even if the end result is spaghetti. Or Vue 2 and be done with it.
You can just see that JQuery is still not dead and thats says a lot about its utility. It is not fancy to use it anymore but it is still widely used in Production. And yes, Vue2 was a breath of fresh air compared to React for me personally BUT I am afraid Vue3 is on the wrong track :(
Ha! Okay in reality I hope most people aren’t starting new codebase without a template or skeleton. Manually typing out all those configs was hilarious! I get your point. Totally agree that modern dev is out of hand. At the same time we always tradeoff complexity for scaling. A lot of this modern mess is companies thinking they’re Facebook or Google. The prevalence of react and technical interviews based on algorithms says more about the immaturity of the people making architectural decisions and development hiring practices at companies. This is probably my age showing, but I feel we’ll continue to fall deeper into these holes until the industry starts valuing experience that spans technology over specialists in the framework du’jour. Not holding my breath for that one - but we can pray. 😉
Maybe web frameworks need to do better at helping people know when to use them. Maybe developers need to delay using a framework until it’s clear that the benefits outweigh the costs.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but: While easy to setup (if you’re already a .Net dev), doesn’t Blazor result in the client downloading a >1MB web assembly blob just to run? IIRC, it has a lot of complexity as well, it’s just a bit more tucked away and doesn’t rear its head until you start hitting edge cases. DISCLAIMER: I am not a .NET guy nor have I touched Blazor but have only researched it out of curiosity once! 😅 So, I’m honestly just asking.
@@patricknelson Well its shifting around now fast now but before you had server mode, runs on server but updates over signalR(websockets) and you had client mode, running on assembly and then yeah you had to download dlls. Now there is a mix of it, so you can run it in "auto" mode and it runs on server the first time, then it downloads and caches the dlls so next time you are visiting that page you are in assembly mode that already has all the data on the client. Really fantastic stuff, but very new so lets see where it goes
I have to say as someone who has been doing fairly basic frontend work for about a year. I don't understand why everything is so overcomplicated. "Oh this is the fastest JS framework" - ok, what... faster than HTML and CSS? I appreciate that there is a reason for everything to exist but for someone who is trying to trudge through learning JS and being surrounded by all these frameworks and libraries for things, its a bit nerve wracking. Stuff like Astro I think is interesting - render everything out as HTML unless you literally require the JS but even that is still quite a bit of config.
The reason, why this "what faster than HTML and CSS" might be that no one nowadays does plain html-css/html-css-js frontend projects, because they are exponentially hard to scale. In this video setting up react app by hand takes time (like 80% of the time of coding part). If he would do plain "npx create-react-app", video would would start 2:49 and end in 3:55. But I think, I understood the point of the video. The package implementation for simple actions just sometimes gets ridiculous in react
Because of scalability. Try to maintain huge apps written in plain JS, where there is no IntelliSense, no static-type checking, no compiler-errors, no types of your data, with no reactivity, no components and no modules. And the list can go on and on
All of these comments are correct, however I will go one step further and say that it is because JavaScript isn’t good for web development. It was a brilliant hack that never got the design treatment it needed.
To add to _all of this_ - I think that this is partly why HTMX is so in vogue right now. For some apps (particularly back-end heavy ones), it offers a very good alternative to structuring things to be JS heavy. I don’t use HTMX but I figured I’d throw it out there, haha.
This is like taking a train just to get to a store down the street instead of just walking for 2 minutes, then complaining that the process of going to the store is too complicated because of trains…
For me most of this "reinventing the wheel" it's just to keep the "education" industry running. New tech, new courses, new bugs and so on. I'm not advocating for one way to do everything, but there's no reasonable explanation why we need 10 lines of code to embed a single video.
This problem has several causes, or what I would call 'collaborative bad decisions'. - Support for very old browsers. This is when 98% suffer from kilobytes of extra and unnecessary code for them to support 2%. - Vanilla HTML does not allow to adequately fulfill all the tasks of modern applications. It's very easy to make a RUclips player page, but how do you make a social network? How will you get data, display it, move between pages? To solve such problems, at best you will use JS (with consequences in the first paragraph), and sometimes JS on the server side (the server to get the data already from the backend server). By the way, it was rightly pointed out in the comments below, that we are going back to the good old servers and taking js there... - How did JS even manage to get to the server? It's a scripting language for browsers. It's the same as if C got into browsers, ah, it's already... - Native solutions. Strongly inferior to JS solutions in terms of customization, different on different browsers. This is the reason for all these hundreds of thousands of libraries and point 1 and 2. - Time > quality. Usability > space. You can understand it in the commercial world, when you need to make a product as fast as possible and use such tools. Why in all this time has no one made a tool that could do both? This problem has been with us for years, just slowly gaining momentum. People (or rather corporations) couldn't agree on how to create a nice environment for it all, and it's us who are suffering. As far as I know, this is not just a WEB problem. It will be worse in the future.
For the longest time you've had this vibe of being the older guy at the skate park with some shit to get off his chest and the music choice confirms this for me But yeah web development is a rigmarole for setup, like truly! Working outside of create-react-app brutally reminds me of all the transpilation etc. Haha
Dude, I'm the 31-year-old guy at my local skatepark at 8:00 a.m. it's nice to have the park to myself for 2 hours before all the kids show up and act like I'm covered in mega-AIDS
I am so confused... When you create a react app, it makes all the boilerplate code for you... You're like take like 14x longer lol... And you're also making 1 component. Try making 2737 components 🤪
Love the video but I think it's kind of an unfair comparison. These frameworks are generally meant to support MAJOR large scale applications. If you just wanted to embed a youtube video or make static pages, you wouldn't use the framework because it would be bloated with features you'll never utilize. I still do agree that the complexity of web app development in general is completely ridiculous.
Wicked choice of background music, feel free to use any of my beats in your videos, I have a playlist that you can easily RUclips-dl and I'll approve any claims, just don't use any actually released songs and you'll be fine 👌
My dude, I just finished graduating my bachelors and I’ve been looking for good content I could learn more from. Your shit is hella good, not bloated and if I’d take a guess newcomers to the space will definitely find good value from your videos. This video really puts the pin in a problem you, me and many others have struggled to understand. We have immensely with opportunities but at the same time it feels like we are going backwards.
Did u realize that u can just use boilterplate, there are many available and you don't need sass, typescript and many other things for just that? Stop crying about web development state and stop exaggerating issues. Nobody use all this things for simple few lines websites. Now try making big social media app in plain html vs with all those technologies, good luck.
Admittedly, this feels like the classic tree swing meme. If all you want is a page with a particular youtube clip on it. That's so easy! The boiler plate configuration that not just nodejs, but sometims other langauges require does seem kind of insane.
no, i have used vanilla js for years and years and i can tell, people who are complaining about "complexity" of current web development, just dont realize that they do actually need those tools as they continue developing
These tools are used for a reason, if you are working alone on a simple webpage just use simple html, css and js, but don't put down technologies that are used in very complex team projects and frameworks. Idk why we always need to say something is "bad" to make a point. You should know better Chris...
I was listening to RUclips music app before I decided to go check out RUclips and can to see what Was on this channel. I had to check out why RUclips music wouldn't stop playing 😆 lol dope Bay Area Hits
Can wipe up a site in a day that takes weeks to months on laravel...sure it has awesome scalability but time is a factor....south park is hand drawn every show can working with a hug inventory of assets bigger down dev times, now they hand draw in a couple days
Stop configuring webpack by hand! What are you a masochist? Don't you use NextJS/etc...? Those take care of the build pipeline for you (for the most part) - so you don't have to think about it. They literally have people on their team they PAY to think about this so we don't have to.
@callthecapital I don't think so, just seems to be more complaining about the proliferation of tooling. I feel that most complaining about these things comes from not knowing how to properly abstract them, like @Jonatham said: why the hell are you writing your webpack config by hand? In most cases you're not doing something an existing framework hasn't solved 10x over, don't reinvent the wheel
There are so many ways to skip this step. Like there are so many ways to write less code and be faster dev. Don't build anything from scratch unless it's what your agreement states.
@@tefkah That's what I'm saying. The point of the vid is to illustrate that you should NOT be starting these web projects from scratch. The vid shows why. Use a framework, I agree.
@@callthecapital8631 Ah alright, but I don't think that that was the point of the authors vid, seeing as they switched to plain HTML afterwards and recently made a couple of videos bemoaning modern web dev in general. The title also seems to suggest that they see this as indicative of the current state of web dev, which we agree it isn't if you just let something else configure web dev. They (I think) seem to be saying "we shouldn't need/use all this tooling INCLUDING frameworks", rather than "wow haha look at how much effort doing webpack at hand is sure glad I have (literally anything) to configure that for me"
To hell with npx create-react-app. True vanilla JavaScripters write their own kernel, LLVM compiler, OS sandbox, Browser sandbox, and XML-based DSL for declarative UI definitions. document.createElement? More like docment.thisIsTooComplicated.
This says more about the culture behind web development. A lot of people haven't learnt why complexity is bad, and so you get this situation where systems are intentionally made more complicated than they need to be.
no my dude, literally everyone knows why complexity is bad lol All these tools were made for a reason, and you don't even need all of this to have dynamic html to begin with. Just use petite vue, put a single script tag on the header and youre good to go
I think I can see two sides to this. Web development has gotten very complex. On the other hand a video like this (While def funny Chris) isn't using these tools for what they were built for. Large projects with multiple developers.
@@shatley123 But is web development only complicated because people make it complicated?
Not gonna lie, this is probably one of the last channels I expected to hear Luniz, top shelf weed track 👍🏿
Chris is old G
I actually refreshed the page just to confirm it wasnt some sort of audio-video glitch. I havent been this pleasantly surprised in a while - as a software dev and a 90s music fan, this is possibly best BGM to code with. Well played Mr Hawkes, well played.
@@umarbabajidda9664 same, thought I was trippin
Is the code on the show real?
You know it 🔥
One would like to start simple and keep it growing as needed. Web develepment nowadays is like: install, configure and deploy everything I will need in the next 10 years, just in case
Relatable, more and more this makes me dislike webdev. The endless configuration and config files for everything.
My favorite has been recently seeing articles about how great server side rendering can be like it's some new invention.
thisssss
Webdev literally running in circles now lol
😂😂😂😂
the difference is current server side rendering works together with the client side code
so once you can continue using the routes and stuff
i have used vanilla js and server rendered html together for years and years
and yes its better now
Having complexity at both client and server ends is an unstable state. I think ultimately all the complexity will shift to the server side, and the client will just turn into the equivalent of a dumb terminal.
I think the problem is too many dependencies. Unfortunately working in teams leans toward using frameworks to keep coding following a convention, but really we should be trying to get as vanilla as possible these days.
svelte
@@syfenx Svelte is good, but it has some limitations that aren't necessary if one is using vanilla js in an evergreen browser. Proxies ftw.
Lit element is the way to stay vanilla as it just creates native web components. This whole video seems to be about making it as hard to use as possible
@@overbyte using things like decorators means using babel and using babel means having a toolchain. Vanilla requires none of this. It might not be the fastest solution, but the majority of what lit provides can be done with pure CSS and pure JS with no pre-processing needed.
what's wrong with using frameworks? Reinventing wheels won't save me any time
web dev is basically just building one of those model kits. most pieces are already made, you just need to glue it together then give it a nice coat of paint (css).
There has been this idea for a while that the developer community doubles about every 5 years. That given about half the developers out there are new with less than 5 years of experience. Imagine that this reality states more than half the developers out there came into this environment only knowing about JavaScript frameworks and not ever being exposed to the idea of just starting with an empty folder and adding just an index.html, styles.css, and a scripts.js to build an app.
We have definitely jumped the shark in the webdev space and should probably take a critical look at our practices and see where some balance can come back. Simplicity isn’t a bad thing.
Would you expect a mobile app to be developed in 3 files? Or a rest API? Webdev is becoming more mature and catching up to backend with better tooling and build systems, things like static types. I've worked on many garbage 3-file web apps back in the day and it was a mess of css either orphaned or bleeding into unwanted elements, copy-pasted html all over the place, and horrible pre-es6 JavaScript that lived in callback hell. Anyone who thinks what we had back in the day was "simpler" is either misremembering or only did simple hello world applications.
@@avoerman89 Starting out simplr and then building on top of it as and when your project becomes complex is what OP is referring. Like you first teach how to compile manually using gcc and flags and stuff, and then move onto build systems like CMake once you start to get whats going on and the upward steps continue.
Nobody is learning just frameworks or whatever and skipping vanilla stuff. I'm a learner and I can promise you it's just not happening
I agree with you. What i'm afraid of is the plethora of those "bootcamps", promising you to become a web developper in 1to 6 months (don't know for the rest of the world, but here, in France, they're everywhere).
You end up with peoples who only knows React, unable to do VanillaJS, or understanding client/server architecture. Will those people suceed in their careers ? I think so, if they are willing to learn. But it's like learning to run before walking. You got to know the basics.
I just graduated with my CS degree and got an offer for a software engineering position, after seeing this, the question is: why the hell would I ever want to touch front end development?
@Augusto Alvarez I guess so, thankfully I didn't get a position for front end web development.
Congrats!!
I just got my first job as a web developer simply by being self taught. they code in react js next js with tailwind css. I was lucky because these are the frameworks I taught myself. Its crazy but im sure being a jr web dev they dont expect to much from you. Im just hoping I dont run into any crazy configs or things like that. I am nervous my first day is this wed LOL
@@realchrishawkes thanks!!!
Congrats man
I really like JavaScript, but this is partially why I refocused my efforts from web development to learning SQL, Python, and database development (that, and I have a potential job opportunity as a SQL dev). I’ll always enjoy doing web design in my free time, but I’m really enjoying learning database development, and it just seems like less of a headache to learn so far.
I just realized that I’d rather continue learning and doing web development stuff in my free time rather than doing it as a career.
That being said, I still recommend learning how to code by starting with web development.
your "plain html + css + javascript" is unmaintainable after a few weeks in, not to speak that most of the tools you configured by hand already come pre configured in most frameworks. Also, the tools you configured for the "madness" are toold that HELP you make your code better. Typescript helps you find bugs before you even start the app. Babel helps your javascipt be compatible across way more devices. Webpack/rollup/etc is used to tree shake and lower your bundle size. SASS helps you write better CSS, it has a lot of useful stuff like inheritance.
Also why did you even configure webpack by hand?
And then you go and claim "plain html" is way simpler... well yes if all you're doing is a simple homepage. No one in their right mind would make a web app in plain javascript nowadays, that's insanity and asking for your project to grow technical debt.
You could have made a point about the web being bloated without having been so dishonest. This video felt like that meme image about sticking a stick on your own bycicle wheel and then blaming something else.
I think you are missing his point. Yes there are cases when complexity and boilerplates help do things faster BUT a lot of cases do not require this level of complexity and we have gone way too far in one direction. Not everyone is building the next facebook or whatever. Create React App type stuff is way over engineered for basic use cases and thats the point he is making. A lot of new devs don't even understand how to write a basic HTML with some JS sprinkled in (which can serve lot of real world use cases).
More than anything else, thanks for dropping this track for us OGs in the room 😎
One of the things that impressed me most when I moved from desktop (WinForms) development to react was the huge size of the application folder with `node_modules` installed.
ikr, and those are minified files...text files.
Text takes up so little space, so to pile up gigabytes of it each dependency needs to have thousands of SLOC. I don't remember the exact size but vibe-d (a D web server and web framework) takes up only a few megabytes. I have no idea wtf JS Devs are doing anymore
haha, when I started this video I figured had a 50/50 chance of going either way: this was either going to be a "look how fast I made a complex site with these tools. Awesome!" or "look how ridiculously long it takes to just get everything set up. this is a living nightmare."
Now generate multiple of these from a list of links returned by an api. Now html and pure js is a pain isn't it? You can have that without all that setup with petite vue for example. Web development has an entire range of complexity for you to choose from, analyse the trade offs and choose one which is more valuable for your goals
I get your point but your example is still just 5-6 lines of JS and requires 0 configuration
@@spicynoodle7419 show me those lines, they can easily fit in a comment here
@@gamerzero6085
const res = await fetch('/api/links')
const links = await res.json()
document.querySelector('.js-link-list').innerHTML = links.map(({ href, label }) => `
${label}
`)
No dependencies, no bundle, 1000x faster than React. Yes it isn't scalable but within the context of the topic it proves my point.
React version:
import React from 'react'
import ReactDOM from 'react-dom'
const Item = ({ href, label }) => (
{label}
)
const App = () => {
const [links, setLinks] = React.useState([])
React.useEffect(async () => {
const res = await fetch('/api/list')
setLinks(await res.json())
}, [])
}
return (
{ links.map((link, idx) => ) }
)
}
ReactDOM.render(, document.getElementById('root'))
Well... that's like 4x longer than the vanilla version and requires you to know the intricacies of the react lifecycle.
@@spicynoodle7419 Not to take away from your great example but i'd probably add a .join("") after the map :)
@@zeez7777 good catch :D "[object Object]" "[object Object]" "[object Object]"
So very true!
I was put off from frameworks like Angular because it seemed like it made my code more complicated than it needed to be.
Developers need to start learning to just say no
Yeah... so a few years ago everybody was bashing jQuery, saying it creates spaghetti code and we have to get rid of it. Now, if that was spaghetti, then what the hell is this React/Webpack stuff? Honestly, with jQuery I can actually code faster overall, even if the end result is spaghetti.
Or Vue 2 and be done with it.
You can just see that JQuery is still not dead and thats says a lot about its utility. It is not fancy to use it anymore but it is still widely used in Production. And yes, Vue2 was a breath of fresh air compared to React for me personally BUT I am afraid Vue3 is on the wrong track :(
Ha! Okay in reality I hope most people aren’t starting new codebase without a template or skeleton. Manually typing out all those configs was hilarious! I get your point.
Totally agree that modern dev is out of hand. At the same time we always tradeoff complexity for scaling. A lot of this modern mess is companies thinking they’re Facebook or Google.
The prevalence of react and technical interviews based on algorithms says more about the immaturity of the people making architectural decisions and development hiring practices at companies.
This is probably my age showing, but I feel we’ll continue to fall deeper into these holes until the industry starts valuing experience that spans technology over specialists in the framework du’jour.
Not holding my breath for that one - but we can pray. 😉
You seem to have to do more loading, installing and configuration than actual web development. Looks like utter hell :-)
How about a real project? That's it. The video just shows us react is not for super tiny projects.
Agreed, the configurations have gone completely insane and unmanageable
Maybe web frameworks need to do better at helping people know when to use them. Maybe developers need to delay using a framework until it’s clear that the benefits outweigh the costs.
This is why we use Blazor. Don't have to fiddle with babel, TS, lints yadayada. Just write the code..
Correct me if I’m wrong, but: While easy to setup (if you’re already a .Net dev), doesn’t Blazor result in the client downloading a >1MB web assembly blob just to run? IIRC, it has a lot of complexity as well, it’s just a bit more tucked away and doesn’t rear its head until you start hitting edge cases.
DISCLAIMER: I am not a .NET guy nor have I touched Blazor but have only researched it out of curiosity once! 😅 So, I’m honestly just asking.
@@patricknelson Well its shifting around now fast now but before you had server mode, runs on server but updates over signalR(websockets) and you had client mode, running on assembly and then yeah you had to download dlls. Now there is a mix of it, so you can run it in "auto" mode and it runs on server the first time, then it downloads and caches the dlls so next time you are visiting that page you are in assembly mode that already has all the data on the client. Really fantastic stuff, but very new so lets see where it goes
Looks like Lit does have some starter projects or pre-bundled files you can download...
I have to say as someone who has been doing fairly basic frontend work for about a year. I don't understand why everything is so overcomplicated. "Oh this is the fastest JS framework" - ok, what... faster than HTML and CSS?
I appreciate that there is a reason for everything to exist but for someone who is trying to trudge through learning JS and being surrounded by all these frameworks and libraries for things, its a bit nerve wracking.
Stuff like Astro I think is interesting - render everything out as HTML unless you literally require the JS but even that is still quite a bit of config.
The reason, why this "what faster than HTML and CSS" might be that no one nowadays does plain html-css/html-css-js frontend projects, because they are exponentially hard to scale. In this video setting up react app by hand takes time (like 80% of the time of coding part). If he would do plain "npx create-react-app", video would would start 2:49 and end in 3:55. But I think, I understood the point of the video. The package implementation for simple actions just sometimes gets ridiculous in react
Because of scalability. Try to maintain huge apps written in plain JS, where there is no IntelliSense, no static-type checking, no compiler-errors, no types of your data, with no reactivity, no components and no modules. And the list can go on and on
All of these comments are correct, however I will go one step further and say that it is because JavaScript isn’t good for web development. It was a brilliant hack that never got the design treatment it needed.
To add to _all of this_ - I think that this is partly why HTMX is so in vogue right now. For some apps (particularly back-end heavy ones), it offers a very good alternative to structuring things to be JS heavy. I don’t use HTMX but I figured I’d throw it out there, haha.
Every time I have to config webpack I question my life choices
This is like taking a train just to get to a store down the street instead of just walking for 2 minutes, then complaining that the process of going to the store is too complicated because of trains…
For me most of this "reinventing the wheel" it's just to keep the "education" industry running.
New tech, new courses, new bugs and so on. I'm not advocating for one way to do everything,
but there's no reasonable explanation why we need 10 lines of code to embed a single video.
Thats how we make ourselves future proof to be non-replacable by AI.
This problem has several causes, or what I would call 'collaborative bad decisions'.
- Support for very old browsers. This is when 98% suffer from kilobytes of extra and unnecessary code for them to support 2%.
- Vanilla HTML does not allow to adequately fulfill all the tasks of modern applications. It's very easy to make a RUclips player page, but how do you make a social network? How will you get data, display it, move between pages? To solve such problems, at best you will use JS (with consequences in the first paragraph), and sometimes JS on the server side (the server to get the data already from the backend server). By the way, it was rightly pointed out in the comments below, that we are going back to the good old servers and taking js there...
- How did JS even manage to get to the server? It's a scripting language for browsers. It's the same as if C got into browsers, ah, it's already...
- Native solutions. Strongly inferior to JS solutions in terms of customization, different on different browsers. This is the reason for all these hundreds of thousands of libraries and point 1 and 2.
- Time > quality. Usability > space. You can understand it in the commercial world, when you need to make a product as fast as possible and use such tools. Why in all this time has no one made a tool that could do both?
This problem has been with us for years, just slowly gaining momentum. People (or rather corporations) couldn't agree on how to create a nice environment for it all, and it's us who are suffering. As far as I know, this is not just a WEB problem.
It will be worse in the future.
The React Components are the main reason I use it, but I also use pure HTML for small things like this to test quickly
Job preservation/justification?
this video exposes the hype of developer feeding their own desires instead of doing the right thing right
Why most web developers never went to college but college requires type of degree?
I had to check across 23 tabs on 6 browser windows to make sure the sound wasnt coming form somewhere else !
For the longest time you've had this vibe of being the older guy at the skate park with some shit to get off his chest and the music choice confirms this for me
But yeah web development is a rigmarole for setup, like truly! Working outside of create-react-app brutally reminds me of all the transpilation etc. Haha
Dude, I'm the 31-year-old guy at my local skatepark at 8:00 a.m. it's nice to have the park to myself for 2 hours before all the kids show up and act like I'm covered in mega-AIDS
You actually did not even need any server/npm run start.. You could have just opened the html file directly in your browser..
Parcel is so much faster and easier to setup than this webpack insanity.
Vite has saved me tens of hours.
goddamit i hate web development
HA, could tell something like this was coming eventually based off the titles of your last couple vids. That's some high quality h2content0
Wow a real eye-opener Chris. It really is dependency soup.
Classic hip hop right there
Luniz + Web Development what a fine mix.
> let's do web components, gotta be close to the platform
> welp, the API kinda clunky isn't it, let's add a framework on top!
I am so confused... When you create a react app, it makes all the boilerplate code for you...
You're like take like 14x longer lol...
And you're also making 1 component.
Try making 2737 components 🤪
overcomplicating a simple thing such as web development, and you get this garbage.
+1
Agreed… web dev has become ridiculous and complex. The community needs to take a step back and consider simplicity once again.
Love the video but I think it's kind of an unfair comparison. These frameworks are generally meant to support MAJOR large scale applications. If you just wanted to embed a youtube video or make static pages, you wouldn't use the framework because it would be bloated with features you'll never utilize. I still do agree that the complexity of web app development in general is completely ridiculous.
it makes me want to become cobalt guy who clocks in ... gets paid hella ... clocks out
Wicked choice of background music, feel free to use any of my beats in your videos, I have a playlist that you can easily RUclips-dl and I'll approve any claims, just don't use any actually released songs and you'll be fine 👌
Theme?
What extension is it that shows Docker Hub and Suggested Docker Hub Images in your sidebar?
Complexity stems from notion of covering all of your basis. You can't, ever, something always pops out.
Creativity 10/10. Again, I am a huge proponent of plain vanilla web technologies. We're just doing too much trying to reinvent the wheel.
My dude, I just finished graduating my bachelors and I’ve been looking for good content I could learn more from. Your shit is hella good, not bloated and if I’d take a guess newcomers to the space will definitely find good value from your videos.
This video really puts the pin in a problem you, me and many others have struggled to understand. We have immensely with opportunities but at the same time it feels like we are going backwards.
Did u realize that u can just use boilterplate, there are many available and you don't need sass, typescript and many other things for just that? Stop crying about web development state and stop exaggerating issues. Nobody use all this things for simple few lines websites. Now try making big social media app in plain html vs with all those technologies, good luck.
Or just use lit + vite and skip half of that boilerplate :)?
Never seen somebody use LIT in such a complicated way.
Accurate af
Admittedly, this feels like the classic tree swing meme. If all you want is a page with a particular youtube clip on it. That's so easy!
The boiler plate configuration that not just nodejs, but sometims other langauges require does seem kind of insane.
The problem is NPM itself, hopefully it's gone one day for good
I've been doing some C++ dev with cmake, and I thought that build system was stupid....
If it takes long, it's wrong. Choose boring technology.
no, i have used vanilla js for years and years
and i can tell, people who are complaining about "complexity" of current web development, just dont realize that they do actually need those tools as they continue developing
Well, maybe that's not the appropriate tool for that job.... Just maybe! 😂
Crazy industry (it jobs non-freelance) right now need it from you and you dont have choice - that is crazy.
Not much script left in the Java 😅
Actually that's why I like where Rails is going with Hotwire : it's HTML
You're right, close the loophole Once & for all, ditch Svelte/Solid & go for Elm!
1000 hours later....
Write vanilla js in lit element and use css. This will give you a 0 compilation workflow. Webpack is not your friend
Very, very creative video. Hats off.
Thats why i use „create vite”
oh boy, epic!
These tools are used for a reason, if you are working alone on a simple webpage just use simple html, css and js, but don't put down technologies that are used in very complex team projects and frameworks. Idk why we always need to say something is "bad" to make a point. You should know better Chris...
why dont people just stick with vue? Its kind of like this but way less complicated.
Doesn't look good on Resume because hey everyone does React :)
what is the point of the video?
Confusing, over complicated configurations are now the norm
@@ChrisAthanas why is that, is it implying that people choose more complex ways to do things than the easier way?
Yeah. The video is just a joke. Nobody does that this way.
@@renifer483 i guess i just didn't get the joke then, oh well xD
@@renifer483 ha you would be surprised!
Hahaha I love it! 20 files, 30 megabytes for simple hello world instead single html file :D
last place I'd expect to hear this song lmfao! but yes i agree with the title
I just saw lit yesterday on one site, really interesting tool.
I was listening to RUclips music app before I decided to go check out RUclips and can to see what Was on this channel. I had to check out why RUclips music wouldn't stop playing 😆 lol dope Bay Area Hits
I bought code hawk about a year and a half ago. Will ever thing update automatically?
Can wipe up a site in a day that takes weeks to months on laravel...sure it has awesome scalability but time is a factor....south park is hand drawn every show can working with a hug inventory of assets bigger down dev times, now they hand draw in a couple days
That's insane bro
This is why avoid any framework lol, just give me plain html css & js
frameworks are so bloated and completely unnecessary for many projects. It's a shame we have made web dev such a mess
Yeah back in the day when we rammed jQuery at everything webdev so clean and pristine
Quote me when the YT algorithm blesses you!
whenever i see webpack config, welp am outta here
Stop configuring webpack by hand! What are you a masochist?
Don't you use NextJS/etc...? Those take care of the build pipeline for you (for the most part) - so you don't have to think about it. They literally have people on their team they PAY to think about this so we don't have to.
that's the point
@callthecapital I don't think so, just seems to be more complaining about the proliferation of tooling. I feel that most complaining about these things comes from not knowing how to properly abstract them, like @Jonatham said: why the hell are you writing your webpack config by hand? In most cases you're not doing something an existing framework hasn't solved 10x over, don't reinvent the wheel
There are so many ways to skip this step. Like there are so many ways to write less code and be faster dev. Don't build anything from scratch unless it's what your agreement states.
@@tefkah That's what I'm saying. The point of the vid is to illustrate that you should NOT be starting these web projects from scratch. The vid shows why. Use a framework, I agree.
@@callthecapital8631 Ah alright, but I don't think that that was the point of the authors vid, seeing as they switched to plain HTML afterwards and recently made a couple of videos bemoaning modern web dev in general. The title also seems to suggest that they see this as indicative of the current state of web dev, which we agree it isn't if you just let something else configure web dev.
They (I think) seem to be saying "we shouldn't need/use all this tooling INCLUDING frameworks", rather than "wow haha look at how much effort doing webpack at hand is sure glad I have (literally anything) to configure that for me"
Fighting with configs more than problems.
Plain html and mo time for that nickel sack 💯👌
Classic 🔥
Web development is a bubble 😅
Chris, I'm very disappointed in you. I know you got the memo that we all switched from webpack to vite.
We're headed there. I'm in the front lines.
u da OG
npm install --save-dev parcel
FTFY
cool, although i have no idea what happened
I think point is that you have to type hundreds lines of messy code to produce almost nothing.
NOTHING
configurate auto compiling dependencies for configurate compiling another dependencies for get finally html -)
Blazor FTW!
there are tools to abstract all of this
Any suggestions?
@@ChrisAthanas remix
@@michaelfrieze remix as in remix(dot)run?
@@ChrisAthanas vite, nextjs, remix in the react ecosystem
ok
I'm dead xD
🤣 painful
To hell with npx create-react-app. True vanilla JavaScripters write their own kernel, LLVM compiler, OS sandbox, Browser sandbox, and XML-based DSL for declarative UI definitions.
document.createElement? More like docment.thisIsTooComplicated.
JSVM? More like Just Stuipd VM.