[nostrademons]

Closure is much more tightly typed and namespaced, it has a larger library of pre-built components, it bans (via compiler warnings) practices that are hard to maintain, and it errs toward verboseness. All of these improve the readability of code at the expense of its writability. In a large established organization, you read code much more than you write it. In a startup, you write it much more frequently than you read it.

[hokkos]

The react world has flow that does the same type checking, for the bundling webpack is now superior, and warning is handled by eslint, and with babel for ES6, and PostCSS for css next I don't think there is a lot of reasons to use the closure tools apart for the components.

[pbowyer]

> flow that does the same type checking, for the bundling webpack is now superior, and warning is handled by eslint, and with babel for ES6, and PostCSS for css next > I don't think there is a lot of reasons to use the closure tools apart for the components.

The fact that your list is that long is a good reason. Using best-of-class libraries is brilliant (and I'd like to all the time), but using good-enough libraries that are well tested with each other and unlikely with new releases to change behaviour in ways that will create edge-cases or interop problems: that is pragmatic.

Plus the reduction in developer-rabbit-holes when every developer tries to include its own favourite (Webpack! Browserify!), the consistent documentation, and the ease of setup.

Not to say you're wrong, but I feel people overlook the benefit brought by well-developed monolithic frameworks.