Comment by noosphr

Comment by noosphr a day ago

5 replies

Never mistake motion for action.

An eco system moving too quickly, when it isn't being fundamentally changed, isn't a sign of a healthy ecosystem, but of a pathological one.

No one can think that js has progressed substantially in the last three years, yet trying to build any project three years old without updates is so hard a rewrite is a reasonable solution.

gr4vityWall a day ago

> No one can think that js has progressed substantially in the last three years

Are we talking about the language, or the wider ecosystem?

If the latter, I think a lot of people would disagree. Bun is about three years old.

Other significant changes are Node.js being able to run TypeScript files without any optional flags, or being able to use require on ES Modules. I see positive changes in the ecosystem in recent years.

  • noosphr a day ago

    That is motion not action.

    The point of javascript is to display websites in the browser.

    Ask yourself, in the last three years has there been a substantial improvement in the way you access websites? Or have they gotten even slower, buggier and more annoying to deal with?

    • gr4vityWall 9 hours ago

      > The point of javascript is to display websites in the browser.

      I don't follow. JavaScript is a dynamic general purpose programming language. It is certainly not limited to displaying websites, nor it's a requirement for that. The improvements I mentioned in the previous post aren't things you'd get the benefit of inside a web browser.

    • FridgeSeal a day ago

      No but the devs can push slower, buggier, more annoying websites to prod, faster!

      And after all, isn’t developer velocity (and investor benefits) really the only things that matter???

      /sssss

    • throwawayqqq11 18 hours ago

      > modern websites

      Your are comparing the js ecosystem and bad project realizations/designs.

      > Action vs motion

      I think the main difference you mean is the motivation behind changes, is it a (re)action to achieve a meassurable goal, is this a fix for a critical CVE, or just some dev having fun and pumping up the numbers.

      GP mentioned the recent feature of executing ts, which is a reasonable goal imo, with alot of beneficial effects down the line but in the present just another hustle to take care about. So is this a pointless motion or a worthy action? Both statements can be correct, depending on your goals.