[usrusr]

Big disagree on the not using a framework part: far too often that's not so much a lovingly honed craft but an echo of the "websites should work just fine without JavaScript" that has long been given up as a goal but still haunts decisionmaking as an ideal that now serves as an excuse to consider everything client side secondary citizen. "It's JavaScript, right? It's supposed to an unmaintainable mess." If you dig deeper you will often hear something like "And anyways, jquery 3 is still the latest major release so this is definitely state of the art"

[naet]

It's definitely not a perfect metaphor but I enjoy working with vanilla JS or without a framework and I think it's very different from "no JS" (I mean... seems obvious given that it's JS).

You can technically do anything a framework does in your own JS, since they're all just opinionated JS libraries. You can make your own SPA or implement your own VDOM or SSG but it might take a long time and not be as battle tested. On the other hand you're also free to make your own optimizations that might work well for your needs without worrying about a huge framework.

[samwillis]

People can lovingly craft really bad coffee, just as much as good. To them it may be exactly what they want, and that's all that matters.

[usrusr]

I'm not saying that there's no good handcrafted bare browser code out there, and I guess some of the bad wasn't made without love at all. But I've just seen too much of the stuff that seems like it's still standing with half a leg in the age of internet explorer vs netscape, and that was perhaps crafted laboriously but certainly with more contempt than love to consider the loved stuff mow than a rare exception. I guess part of my gut reasoning goes like this: chances are the loved ones have been modernised three times over, while the contemptful implementations live on.

But I can't come up with any coffee analogy for that, there's just no mapping between those spaces that makes any sense.