JavaScript frameworks actually exist for two reasons, one, vanilla JavaScript lacks ease of use (does not suck and I don't care who disagrees) and two, people love over engineering the fuck out of technology. See: technology since the iPhone came out. We have advanced systems around the world spinning up processes to make up for the fact that touch screens are hard to type accurately on.

[–] magic_lobster_party@fedia.io 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

jQuery got popular because Internet Explorer, Firefox, Chrome and other browsers weren’t exactly cross compatible. Writing vanilla JS was risky business in that sense.

It also supported AJAX across all major browsers, which meant the website could make API requests without reloading the entire page. It was super revolutionary to press a button and it only changed a part of the page.

Then Angular and React took it a step forward and that’s where we are now.

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I am very aware of the progression. But you're vastly glossing over how much complexity (and feature set) was added after jQuery. If JavaScript sucks, how would you change it? Shitty browsers implementing it poorly in the past (and safari doing so today) doesn't make it suck.

[–] dejected_warp_core@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

people love over engineering the fuck out of technology

Exhibit A: 2.85 Million packages, as of mid-2023

[–] TrickDacy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Unless those are mostly overly complicated, it doesn't speak to what I'm saying. But I guess it means people like doing their own engineering better than relying on others

[–] zea_64@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 week ago

Immediate mode rendering and components seem to be why people use them. And you know what? The web should natively support those but doesn't (well it kinda bad components, but ehhh). Otherwise I agree, the frameworks are overcomplicated.