[mekkkkkk]

I don't really understand what you are suggesting. If everyone would stop using mainstream frameworks, the result would be endless bespoke ones. As long as programmers want to simplify, innovate and accelerate their work, they're going to leverage and implement abstractions if there is room for it.

I have worked on plenty of projects using their own, homegrown bespoke frameworks, and it ain't pretty. On top of that it is absolutely wasted knowledge that won't translate to any other code base. If you want to argue that it's all incompetence, I guess that's fine. To me it's about familiarity.

[kristopolous]

This imagination that there needs to be a framework is nonsense. It's done by people who have drunk the koolaid and don't have a long view of programming.

The complexity implicating the overhead is an imposed illusion.

All software lays bare the organizational structure that it's created in.

The structures work within other organizations similarly structured.

It's why ruby shops look the same along with php, java, etc. Why it looks like their is a consistency of dynamics among these channels of development.

Some of these institutional structures are healthier and more productive than others.

React, as a codebase is an autocratic hierarchy ultimately run by ignorant indecisive incompetency that fosters cult adherence to achieve ultimately banal ends through a needless level of strife and overhead.

That's effectively most programming teams which is why it's ultimately so popular. It's also why there seems to be so many cocky buffoons in their early 20s doing it.

Those who see a need for frameworks are speaking more to their rigid notions of the organizational structure upon which software is built then upon the technical need at the software level.