|
|
|
|
|
|
by curiously
4119 days ago
|
|
|
about 5k. Funny I thought about the same thing but in the end I considered the amount of work that would be required vs.something that is already working well, easy to understand, skillset being very low if someone needs to pick it up (just jQuery, not even weird object orientated bull crap). Yup, just one single .js file written in jQuery. I am however, curious about React.js, and want to experiment with new components, I doubt I would use Backbone.js however. It took far longer, and more bugs using Backbone.js than using jQuery. I don't know why people are so obsessed with Backbone.js, modularizing, object orientation with Javascript, the language was not optimized for such purposes, it's only with the server side javascript boom with node.js that we are seeing this heavy shift towards Javascript, but I treat Javascript like the second class citizen it really is, and I think it's rather naive to suddenly start using it for everything just because you can and everyone is doing it. |
|
|
* Is it an application (google docs?), if not, you may not need a framework.
* How large is the team? For a solo project, a framework offers less of a consistency benefit. In a group, having people implement the same way can be important, and a framework helps a lot.
* Are you managing a lot of application state in javascript?
I'm out of time, but those are some of the big ones. I've used frameworks in the past, but we're currently doing a classic wizard-style application, and the frameworks don't offer us a lot. If it was less site & more application, I would be pushing for one of the popular frameworks to help manage complexity. Frameworks bring additional complexity, and they need to mitigate a certain amount of complexity to be worth it.