[_virtu]

Why does the JavaScript ecosystem pride itself in not having a framework? That’s the very thing that drove me out of the ecosystem. JavaScript was my first professional language of focus and I was in love with the growth oriented mentality as a younger engineer, but the part that irked me was that I had to constantly be rebuilding the same set of patterns with different tooling, which is the special choose your own adventure hell that is the JS ecosystem.

I left it for elixir and Phoenix and never looked back. There’s just no true ownership and direction that can come close to that of Jose Valim and Chris McCord in the JS ecosystem. It’s so fragmented that it takes the fun out of maintaining a JS codebase.

[zadikian]

Usually the argument against frameworks is that modularity will cover differing use cases better, unlike a framework that becomes hard the moment you need to do something they didn't design for. I've been ok without frameworks, but not sure yet which way is better.

The most annoying thing I've seen in the JS ecosystem is the in-between, libraries that act more like pieces of a framework. Like you have React and foo which you'd expect to be separate libs, but everyone handles that with a react-foo package. Version compatibility becomes a puzzle once you have 2+ of those.

[ValentineC]

> Why does the JavaScript ecosystem pride itself in not having a framework? That’s the very thing that drove me out of the ecosystem.

I don't think that claim's anywhere in the article.

Some people do take pride in how JavaScript has come a long way from the jQuery days.

[hobofan]

That's not what the article says. It's about being agnostic what kind of frontend framework/library you use, e.g. giving the users the freedom to choose between React/jQuery, etc..