[jorgeleo]

<sarcasm> I guess you must still be living in your parent's basement because you must not have many bills to pay </sarcasm>

LOL

Now seriously:

Quite the opposite, I always receive comments on the simplicity of my code.

Also, I code so the user has a pleasant work experience, and also so the CPU executes the code faster, I don't put much attention to the comfort of the next developer, but I am always willing to show and explain what I did and why.

[neosavvy]

Wow, ok.

I won't get into a pissing contest, but I've solved and managed large and small teams. Folks don't like to maintain custom built software solutions that don't use common accepted best practice frameworks.

JQuery is widely accepted as an anti-pattern by huge swathes of the programming community.

You are right though, I've paid off most of my bills and do have a choice in what I work on anymore. I definitely don't live in a basement.

[jorgeleo]

I agree about the pissing contest, Just to document the issue: the same way that my sarcasm touched a nerve in you, the comment "Does anyone else even have a desire" can be read as belittling and condescending. But I rather laugh at it with a sarcasm.

I have never been a follower of what the community says. Half of the time figureheads make bold statements based on an economic agenda more than a technical one. If JQuery is an antipattern... don't know, don't care, what I do know is that is light enough, and provide a simple, compatibility layer across browsers. That is good enough for me.

[neosavvy]

Technically speaking the only reason to avoid JQuery now is because DOM manipulation is more costly than dealing with a more efficient Shadow DOM to manage the lifecycle of UI updates on a screen.

JQuery may be a fast download but JQuery applications can be quite costly to run especially in a non-browser-refresh environment.

I'm sure your JQuery applications are quite efficient, but I am an advocate for choosing modern tools that developers want to work on when you inevitably move on from your projects/customers. I do also advocate for tools that are going to be around to stand the test of time, and in your favor JQuery is a ubiquitous library used all over the place, people do know it, and a customer of yours will have no issue finding someone who is willing to work on it.

I by choice avoid those projects, and have worked with quite a few folks who do things the JQuery way when we are using React or Angular.

Enjoyed the debate today, but my question was largely left unanswered. I was curious if you worked on a large team with your framework/JQuery or if it was a smaller deliverable managed by you and another person or maybe just you.

I have witnessed React and Angular apps with as little as one developer, but up to 30 in some cases all on the same application. Complex applications like Trading Systems and Document delivery with multiple connected users.

I'd wager it's tough to get all of that done without some documented tools and complexity, given the complexity of the business problems at hand.

[bluesnowmonkey]

JQuery is widely accepted as a productive and appropriate tool for many types of projects by huge swathes of the programming community.

I currently help maintain a React app that's approximately a one dev project. It's a beast though. 900 transitive npm dependencies. Huge, brittle build process that has broken in the past and prevented us from deploying critical changes for periods of time while we debugged it. Several long-standing bugs because it's such a hassle to get into. I'm a big fan of jQuery sprinkles in light of this experience.

[brucephillips]

I think you're conflating React with other complexities. React doesn't require 900 npm dependencies.

[varenc]

Are any of the apps you made public? :)

Also sounds like you’re working in a small group? I’ve found large teams will value clarity and maintainabiliy lots more.

[jorgeleo]

Lots of my work is under very restrictive NDAs, so not much public, all though heavily used internally by my clients.