[troughway]

Not only this, but eventually we will ditch JS in favor of something more "isomorphic" with whatever the back-end is using.

Tech like Blazor and related asm.js type thinking will eventually replace JS when it bypasses asmjs completely and ships bytecode that the browser executes directly.

I doubt these frameworks will be much different compared to what we are doing today, because we will still need to deal with layouts, alignments, the color and shape and proportion of things, event handlers etc. The usual stuff.

Ragging on React, Vue, Angular is misguided. These frameworks allow developers to write front-ends as if they are applications, because in a lot of cases, this is what the modern "website" really is. They are training the next generation of front-end developers much like how jQuery did in mid 2000s.

[nitsky]

> Not only this, but eventually we will ditch JS in favor of something more "isomorphic" with whatever the back-end is using.

Why not use JavaScript itself for this? That is the strategy employed by Next.js/Nuxt.js/Sapper/etc. Your React/Vue/Svelte components are rendered on the server and then hydrated on the client.

[bcrosby95]

Why not just have everyone code in Javascript now and forever?

Same reason we didn't settle with everyone coding in C. Or C++. Or Java. Or Python.

The web is just a method of distribution. Not every problem or domain takes equally well to each programming model or language. It would be nice to be able to pick a tech stack that works for my domain and the characteristics of my project, rather than picking a tech stack because of how users access it.

[james-mcelwain]

Because Node.js isn't appropriate for a lot of back-end applications, or for legacy back-end applications that already exist.

[jerf]

Mostly because for all the development done on it, Javascript is still a %50 accurate name; it ain't Java, but it is definitely a scripting language. Node may be popular, but it's lightyears away from being able to say that it's chasing all the other languages out of the server niche, and it's been around for long enough that we can judge it's unlikely ever going to. In 5 years it's going to be a lot easier to get a non-scripting language compiled on to the client than it is to make a scripting language work as your sole backend language.

[james-mcelwain]

That dream is already here if you use Clojure, and it's great! Web assembly makes me very bullish on this kind of setup. Maybe we won't even be targeting the DOM in the future?

[karatestomp]

> Maybe we won't even be targeting the DOM in the future?

Unless the other thing you target instead is similarly well-developed, you're gonna have real trouble with accessibility.

[james-mcelwain]

That's a really good point. Accessibility is super important and a shame that many devs (including myself) forget about it.

[nimmer]

> eventually we will ditch JS in favor of something more "isomorphic" with whatever the back-end is using.

I think you are looking for Nim. It compiles to assembly (through C), javascript, wasm and more.