[yieldcrv]

this is the honeymoon phase, wait until your package manager and transpiler is out of date, and your progressive web app framework is out of date, and your typescript version isnt compatible with the upgrade yet, and tailwinds isnt either or it is but none of the documentation is yet, but you have to upgrade because your CI/CD cant run your version of node anymore

and now you have 100 flags across 5 configuration files and dont know which one to change to make everything work, but changing it might break the ability for a random dependency to compile, and even if you get that to work it turns out your project doesnt render anymore

[quantadev]

Good rant! That's kind of what web-development seems like sometimes. Almost every part of the technology stack is there to fix some other part of the stack that never was ideal to begin with. TypeScript being the best example. It only exists because JavaScript sucks, and JavaScript only ever existed because in 1994ish some guy failed to get Java to run in the browser, and the only reason we're building apps in what was originally a "Document Rendering" system (HTML) was also not by design either but just an accident of history. One train wreck after another.

[agos]

no, it's not a good rant. this is the billionth "web dev is too complicated!" rant that is present under every. single. thread. about any technology vaguely related to front end development.

[lucsky]

I haven't yet reached the end of the comments, but I'm also fully expecting at least one "Electron is a cancer that is eating my computer and the reason why my wife left me".

[phist_mcgee]

This site leans heavily backend it seems. There's a strain of patent smugness that comes with a lot of comments about frontend on this site and it's quite disheartening to see it.

You rarely see frontend devs disparaging backend devs for their tech choices.

[quantadev]

I think back-end development is a much more "comfortable" lifestyle (I'm full stack myself), even if lots of it is technically more difficult coding than front end (i.e. multiple threads, databases, load-balancing, etc), because there's a new front end technology that comes out every couple of years, making many of the front end tech stacks become obsolete rather fast and they're super fragmented in terms of large numbers of different and unique frameworks. Not to mention how plagued front end work was for so many years due browser incompatibility issues.

For example, on the back end in Java there's been just basically SpringBoot for a decade, and as long as you keep up with it's minor changes you're all set.

[phist_mcgee]

I get where you’re coming from, but I think it oversimplifies the challenges front-end developers face, and it feels a bit dismissive of their expertise. Front-end development isn’t just about chasing frameworks—it’s about crafting intuitive, performant, and accessible user experiences in a landscape that’s constantly evolving to meet user needs.

Backend stability has its advantages, but the rapid evolution on the front end reflects a response to real-world challenges—like improving developer ergonomics, addressing accessibility, or enhancing performance. Front-end devs often have to bridge the gap between design, user needs, and tech constraints in ways backend systems rarely have

In the end, the fragmentation you see in front-end frameworks is a strength. It’s not “easier” or “harder”—just different kinds of challenges. Both disciplines are vital, and dismissing one does a disservice to the teams and individuals who keep these systems working in harmony.

[quantadev]

It's not "dismissive" or a "disservice" to say which things I found harder in my 35yrs experience.

I also say C++ is "harder" than Java, and that's not "dismissive" of Java devs. lol. I AM a Java dev. I did C++ for 10 years followed by Java for 25 yrs after that, so I feel justified to have opinions. I could also say Assembly Language was hardest of all but I won't because it might be "dismissive" of any easily-offended C++ devs. :)

[quantadev]

I just started HN a few months ago, so I haven't been around long enough to realize there's certain topics the HN aficionados have grown bored with. My apologies for the disruption.

[yieldcrv]

lol dont worry about that, I’m a regular here and I dont see that

Its just my lived experience of using node.js build systems

[quantadev]

I just hope agos can recognize the sarcasm.

[norman784]

What do you think are the best option to avoid that? I was wondering what could I do with a project that I have that is a long lived code base, so we have some legacy parts.

Looking at the alternatives I was considering Vite with React and Vue plugins (and try to migrate my code so it works by default without any other configuration in Vite) or try Astro (because I have Vue and React) with their default configuration, but still not sure what would be the best option.

If it where just for me I would rather use React like framework (while I don't like that much React) but at least bun supports JSX out of the box and they seems to be working towards having a bundler integrated.

[notRobot]

I've been using it for a long time now and the honeymoon period hasn't ended. I do understand what you're saying, but luckily I keep it pretty simple with a standalone tw executable and no node.js or complicated frameworks, so I have been able to avoid these pitfalls.

https://tailwindcss.com/blog/standalone-cli

[inopinatus]

It’s a standalone executable.

[BillyTheKing]

or just use bun? used to also face all these issues - but with bun it's mostly gone for now (and for newer projects) - hope it stays that way!

[assimpleaspossi]

Or just use CSS. Never had any of those issues.

[azangru]

Always the right choice!

[yieldcrv]

I use bun where I can, and I’ve upgraded old projects to it successfully

the main project I work on uses nx, sst, and pnpm, it’s all tightly coupled. this project is fine for now. just different.