Why We Should Stop Using JavaScript According to Douglas Crockford (Inventor of JSON)

"JavaScript is a smelly language"! Hey, don’t hate the messenger, it’s Douglas Crockford, the cheeky creator of JSON and (former?) JavaScript evangelist who says so! Even though Douglas has spent decades working on JavaScript, he now believes it’s high time we all stopped using it. Do you want to know why? Watch this video and let us know what you think in the comments below.
Check out the home for untold developer stories around open source, careers and all the other cool stuff developers are doing at cult.honeypot.io.
Honeypot is a developer-focused job platform, on a mission to get developers great jobs. Wanna see what we're all about? Visit honeypot.io to find a job you love.
To learn more about Honeypot: bit.ly/3LpAkcU
Follow Douglas:
Website and blog: www.crockford.com
Github: github.com/douglascrockford
Follow us:
Twitter: / honeypotio
Facebook: / honeypotio
LinkedIn: / honeypotio
Instagram: / honeypot.cult

[@MrAgame13]

I will keep using Javascript as long it pays my bills

[@alishapayne4121]

lol agreed

[@lka.02]

😂

[@okseaj]

this is why I propose a JavaScript tax

[@yourix2]

Amen to that brother😂

[@sparkhum]

😂😂

[@daniel4dev]

The point I take away from this that I don't see many other people commenting on is that while Douglas is specifically talking about JavaScript, I see this as a metaphor/opinion that can be applied to the entire development industry. Companies advertise and hire for technologies because the technology has market share, not because it fits into their application stack.

[@gabrielpauna62]

Yeah but they are also ubiquitous, adoption is important for hiring and maintenance

[@laughingvampire7555]

@@gabrielpauna62 and that is why we have all these problems, because all is patched by throwing money at it, not engineering.

[@lemurdinner]

​@@laughingvampire7555 that, and the fact that open source became so political it's not even about writing good software anymore

[@smallbluemachine]

That’s a great point, to use the right tech for the problem. Also he appeals to us to stop using it generally. 🫠

[@asagiai4965]

that's problem the person can be either talking about JavaScript (original) or Javascript (development industry). JavaScript (original) is not just a market share, not just application stack. It is main our basis for the web.

[@berkaybakacak]

“There are still people developing languages but nobody cares. One person can make a programming language, a really good one, but you can’t get adoption for it.” He made a good point and he is absolutely right.

[@Asma.Mirgoul]

Abdolutely????

[@berkaybakacak]

@@Asma.Mirgoul düzeltme için teşekkürler kanka :) yazarken yanlış tuşa basmışım

[@ricardoamendoeira3800]

I was actually confused by that statement, there are quite a few recent languages growing in adoption: Kotlin, Rust, Swift and Go being the main ones but also smaller ones like Julia, Zig and Nim.

[@RottenMuLoT]

Because a language is NOT a framework. The academic vs the "discrete" worlds are very different for inherently good reasons.

[@berkaybakacak]

@@ricardoamendoeira3800 In my opinion, Douglas is referring to languages like Mojo, Vlang, and other lesser-known languages that are fantastic but not widely known among most people. There are even languages that allow programming with commands in the native languages of different countries, but those countries are not even aware of these languages.

[@otter-pro]

He also wrote "JavaScript: The Good Parts", the most popular javascript book. I agree with him 100% about the state of javascript/typescript.

[@thr417]

Can you explain what he meant by there is something wrong with the web dev and js

[@sgwaic]

​@@thr417 if youve used js you should know, the language itself was supposed to be a cool new tool to add interactivity to websites and it had a lot of weird functionality that carried over due to to maintaining backwards compatability. its just a big mess and people made ts to try and mitigate the fact it cant check for type errors but its not even good at that either as it still lets janky code with "any" types and its just more hacky code on top of hacky code. it really is time for a new and clean modern web dev language

[@grimpowsify]

@@sgwaic the fact 'any' exist dont mean you have to use it heavily, like in C# you could use 'object' ... isnt beause there is weird way to do thing that you have to do it weird too ...

[@lukeet331]

​@@sgwaic I would argue every single layer of tech infrastructure we have is hacky shit layered on or interwoven someone else's hacky shit. That's just the nature of development and internet technology as a whole you'll never fix it...

[@rea9lizer]

​@some guy with an internet connection I agree that TS is not good enough but please stop saying TS is bad because of 'any'. Most of the sane devs shouldn't and don't use it.

[@ForTheOmnissiah]

"We're just stuck with this crap, and they keep piling on new features on everything and the new features always create new problems, and it doesn't have to be like that." This guy definitely is aware. This is the current state of software development in a nutshell. It's a nightmare.

[@kasperkat2004]

The syntax of js is garbage and that is why MS developed typescript as a work around this garbage.

[@UnlikelyToRemember]

I love programming in javascript (occasional syntax sins excepted), but then I avoid using what I find to be the "smelly" bits. Maybe the answer is just to come up with some rough consensus on what the smelly bits are and deprecate them (although please not via "use fragrant") ;) Then we can keep using javascript rather tan starting completely from scratch.

[@SiisKolkytEuroo]

@@kasperkat2004 if that were true, then why did typescript keep literally all of javascript's syntax, ie. make it a superset of javascript instead of inventing new syntax That is a rhetorical question of course

[@horridohobbies]

@@kasperkat2004 Unfortunately, TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript which means many web developers will STILL be writing JS code.

[@horridohobbies]

@@UnlikelyToRemember Unfortunately, tons of JS code need to be maintained and you cannot replace all the smelly bits during your maintenance. You're stuck with the crap forever.

[@jamienordmeyer4345]

I've been saying this for years about the web languages in general. HTML and CSS are languages that, though they've been modified to support applications, were designed to describe documents. The application tags and styles were added in with mixed results, but HTML and CSS are STILL languages for describing documents. And JavaScript was invented to support that model. We can obviously create large and complex applications using HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. I'm a professional full-stack engineer, and do this every day. But it WOULD be nice to have modern languages that the browsers understand natively, without transpilers, that were designed from ground up to be for creating applications, not documents with application code thrown on top.

[@MrHeulendoch]

Wasm?

[@jamienordmeyer4345]

@@MrHeulendoch Wasm would be fine for the compiled language that the browser uses for sure, but I'm talking about writing, as a developer, in something other than HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. I'm not a huge fan of Microsoft's XAML language personally (I HATE the whole INotifyPropertyChanged thing), but like the general concept of it, including the way it handles styles. So I'm thinking something roughly akin to that. Then for a programming language that compiles to WASM, maybe something like Rust? Or a version of TypeScript that doesn't need to cater to transpiling to JavaScript. Don't know, haven't spent a ton of time thinking about it.

[@protonneutron9046]

If the market demands it, it will happen. Otherwise, no

[@jamienordmeyer4345]

@@protonneutron9046 Oh, for sure. And I don't see the market demanding it. What we have now DOES work. It's just not ideal in my humble opinion. But it does work. Fortunately, we have tools and frameworks now that can make it easier, and CSS HAS been extended with things like FlexBox and Grid that help with positioning.

[@aethrya]

Thoughts on htmx?

[@Wanderer2035]

I think it’s because when all these new languages were coming out in the 90’s, companies were just still starting to integrate computers and the internet to their business, so they had the flexibility to move to new and better languages when a better one came out. But now, many companies entire digital foundation is built off of one tech stack for 10+ years, and these are massive companies. Imagine all the work of re-training their employees to this new stack, converting their whole code base to this new language. There’s a plethora of things that could go wrong. That’s why it’s hard for PHP to die. It’s hard to blame them really

[@jamesyoo67]

@@jonasjonaitis8571 Ugh PHP are you serious? No offense but I had to work with it for two years and it was pretty painful, for my team at least.

[@kurtsaidwhat]

Exactly. Most the world has been built on old tools. One does not simply make new tools and make a new world.

[@johannestafelmaier616]

One word, legacy. The antagonist of innovation.

[@ohwow2074]

I like PHP. I got to know it recently. Pretty funny. Yet powerful.

[@bonbonbonbons]

​​@@jamesyoo67 Well PHP has changed a bit. Don't tell me you've worked for PHP before 2022 because PHP today is much more different than the PHP years ago (see Laravel). Same with Java years ago and Java now. Languages change, you know.

[@Plankmeister]

I totally understand his sentiment. If we were to gather the best stakeholders in the language/browser space, lock 'em in a room with the brief to create the next gen of DOM and a scripting language to manipulate it, I'm 100% certain that the result would solve all of the DOM and Javascript's shortcomings, be more capable, be faster, more robust and usable. It makes me wonder why there isn't already such a project.

[@calimio6]

There are features that after years have not shipped and bugs with decades just because the different parts could not agree on them. Google does what they like and so does the rest. That's also the main difference with JavaScript vs other languages there is no single party behind it. What ecma says is only valid if the vendors implement it.

[@stephenoshaughnessy2279]

I'd be in favor of those programmers redefining a slimmed down version of JavaScript that follows good programming concepts. Create a structured language template for JavaScript that was taught in C and C++.

[@Martinit0]

@@calimio6 How is that going to change with a new language? It's always going to be a power struggle. That's not a technical problem.

[@calimio6]

@@Martinit0 and what did I say?

[@Jaime-eg4eb]

Because JavaScript already is that. With some back-compatibility issues that are easy to ignore.

[@vladimirputindreadlockrast812]

I took my first JavaScript course in 2000. The teacher said he could see the day when JavaScript would become a dead language. Now, it is more entrenched in web development than ever, and it doesn't look like it's going away any time soon.

[@sixstanger00]

I also first got exposed to JS in college in 2001. While I do think there are some aspects that are "messy," I don't think it's nearly as "smelly" as people suggest. It's honestly no more "messy" than Java, or really any other OOP that uses for loops, if-then-else statements, arrays, etc. What's given JS a bad name is the endless variety of libraries that have started coming out every few months or so. It's cut deep into actual productive coding because devs are constantly being asked to refactor code to utilize the newest version of React, Redux, etc. It's maddening. I'm a firm believer in Vanilla JS. Any time saved by relying on libraries is going to be lost when something goes wrong and now you've got to sift through chunks of code you didn't even write. I few months ago I started a course on React (because it's the latest and greatest, right?). I remember reading the introduction to React and it describing how React lets you output HTML to the DOM interactively. My immediate thought was, "Uhh....but.....can't I already do that? Can't I just write HTML as a string var, and then use innerHTML or insertAdjacentHTML to modify the DOM? And I don't need all this unnecessary React nonsense?"

[@vladimirputindreadlockrast812]

@@sixstanger00 Couldn't have said it better myself. I took a job with a writer's community, and the owner said I needed to embrace jQuery, which I did. I told him that jQuery didn't do anything you can't already do in vanilla JS, and he didn't want to hear about it. I think it's nonsense to have to switch from React to Vue to Angular. Just pick one and run with it.

[@yumyum7196]

@@sixstanger00 I agree with the overreliance on libraries. As far as inserting HTML directly, I think the difference is that React is running an SPA ... unless you wanted to implement that yourself.

[@badass6300]

That's the problem

[@yavarjn2055]

JS was made when we had horrible internet and became the standard for the web. Since then little had changed. It is a dinasaur walking in modern times.

[@napapt]

Well I've been doing web development for a while now and one thing that I came to understand is that there is no perfect technology, there are instead "tradeoffs"

[@ChristopherCricketWallace]

JavaScript IS the tradeoff 😂. it's awful. Typescript is proof.

[@hmacccc]

"There are no solutions. There are only trade-offs" - Thomas Sowell

[@YuriG03042]

there are only 2 types of languages: the ones that everyone hates and the ones that no one uses

[@turolretar]

But those trade offs are not equal, that’s the point, there’s definitely something better than javascript for web. What’s scary is that it’s definitely not the first or the hundredths time someone thought about this and it’s still js all around.

[@docesam]

@@turolretar exactly.

[@jongskie777]

as a web developer, the only concern for us back then when it comes to javascript was browser compatibility, which jQuery has solved, now all these new frameworks etc. instead of making it simple, it just getting way way more complicated.

[@GeneraluStelaru]

Modern requirements are too much for jQuery alone.

[@RyanRouleau]

Try building any modern day frontend with just jquery and see how it goes. We need more complex frameworks and libraries to support more complex applications

[@jongskie777]

@@RyanRouleau its doable, but its x3 the effort. But very doable.

[@kristiformilchev6417]

​@@RyanRouleau Can you tell me where's the common ground between react and jQuery please, might have missed something in the past 10 years but i am pretty sure they have absolutely nothing in common. Also React is the bane of all evil, yes it basically a standard, but it's also proven that we need code academies to teach people basic syntax these days, so i wouldn't compare anything modern to being close to better then X from before. If you want to compare vanilla javascript and react you would most likely point to web components than Jquery, bot fit the same requirements, problem is web components take much more effort to achieve the same thing. The biggest issue however, is that people are taking it too far, the web was created as a medium to share information not to build software on top of it, and nowadays people want to build desktop applications on top of the web which is frankly stupid and 9/10 a complete flop.

[@pdcmoreira]

@@kristiformilchev6417 How is it "stupid" and "a complete flop" when web apps are extremely successful and their advantages are obvious?

[@smoothbeak]

I really enjoy hearing from Doug, I remember seeing his history of JavaScript/programming a number of years ago that were really eye opening

[@AdminAntitask]

same here, I learned a lot from Doug back in the days...

[@smoothbeak]

@@AdminAntitask :) I remember a while back a lot of people got mad at him for something

[@JasonLatouche]

I'd love to see this. Do you know where I can find it?

[@peterlinddk]

I absolutely love JavaScript, and I agree with everything Crockford says in this short video. It seems that a lot of the commenters here think that the problems with JavaScript can be solved by taking features AWAY from it, and let it resemble older languages like C more. But he clearly states that we need a new generation of programming languages - he talks about how development of new languages kind of stopped with Java and JavaScript. He doesn't mention C#, PHP, Python, Ruby etc. but they are all from about 25 years ago, and it does indeed seem that we are stuck - and that is a bad thing! The problem isn't whether you have one, two, or three equalsigns, or whether you need to define your datatypes yourself or let the compiler figure it out - the problem is that our entire model of what programming should be, is still stuck in the 1990s ...

[@BrandonGiordano]

I think it will happen but its important to understand that they kind of people who make these types of decisions will always be influenced by their bottom line. If their clients need a product and their engineers are experienced in js what incentive do they have to innovate?

[@AnthonyIle]

This man is golden, selfless, humble enough to tell you to look beyong them. I have always had the dream to be mentored by people like this. Sir, your words are golden and perfect for the next generation to learn from.

[@JacobHo161]

At end of the day, it depends on how we use it. If we want static type we can typescript it. If we want functional programming we can write in functional way. If we want no-exceptions pattern like Golang we can add lint to block the build Maybe I’m missing something but what things materially make it bad?

[@princehamza890]

your codebase is always huge mess with JS because it is imperative compare that to elegant declarative language like Haskell

[@RadTwin]

I love this type of controversial content

[@davidross1560]

Agreed, although I wish it was longer. 2 mins is way too short.

[@BenTilford]

Douglas Crockford loves telling people what they shouldn't do

[@Daijyobanai]

you mean clickbait content?

[@Markyparky56]

For a moment WebAssembly looked to be set to replace Javascript, but it requires a load of glue and boilerplate to bootstrap, tying it back into JS. The tooling around it is a mess. Coupled with the extra cost in terms of binary size and start-up latency compared to JS, we're stuck with JS since it provides that instant responsiveness people want from the web. You can't escape it. Still, developing a JS replacement is a worthwhile endeavour, but I don't envy the people tasked with it. The web is probably the largest single attack surface in Tech, security in any new language has to be a priority. And web browsers are some of the most labyrinthian code projects out there, with some of the most obscure and opaque management structures to boot. Getting anything new added and standardised requires wrangling at least three multinationals and who knows how many committees and working groups. It takes at minimum months to sometimes years for anything to happen. (How long has WebGPU been in development now?) It is apt that Douglas should mention generations. The Web tech-space is trapped between two generations. Development of browsers and their supporting technologies is more akin to the days of Waterfall design practices, while all the companies leveraging JS for the next big thing are all about Agile methods. One wouldn't be surprised if that creates a bit of a language barrier.

[@PeterBernardin]

When WASM will be able to directly access the DOM, without having to use JS as a middle-man, that will be a big day.

[@hbp_]

​@@PeterBernardin or if there was no DOM there would be less to standardize and the browser would be simpler. Why don't we just let web frameworks draw whatever. The document model is dead.

[@PeterBernardin]

@@hbp_ You can already do that with stuff like Offscreen canvas and webgl and wasm. I think that's how flutter works. Along those lines at least. The issue is you have to ship an entire rendering pipeline with the app. Huge bundle. Also no standard for SEO.

[@Originalimoc]

Wait isn't wasm start-up faster?

[@hbp_]

@@PeterBernardin will it be much bigger tho. The quick solution to SEO could be to serve the text contents either just for the robots or in some hidden part. How did they solve this with Flash based websites?

[@capability-snob]

Doug was there when E (the language which inspired JavaScript's promise implementation) was created, and honestly, the web should steal the rest of E - especially the capability model that enables secure interaction with the UI. The existing DOM is broken beyond repair: if you grant any component the ability to render nodes, you also grant the ability to load JavaScript with the global window in scope, and it inherits the ambient authority that comes from the SOP.

[@JesseGilbride]

They're working on it, Mr. Crockford, and it's much improved since 2015 - especially with TypeScript (and I hear native typing is on the horizon).

[@troooooper100]

Typescript 🤮

[@yapdog]

I agree 100% with everything he said. And that's why I've been years in development on a new platform that allows for the easy development & adoption of new languages.

[@JohnTurner313]

1:15 "There are terrible mistakes in the way the web works , in the way our operating systems work..." As a graybeard whose favorite language is COBOL, I agree with him 100%. It sounds stupid, but I absolutely guarantee the internet was not supposed to end up the way it has. It is just what happens when folks focus on short term profit and clicks (attention) instead of actually doing something productive long term.

[@kasperkat2004]

I agree. There is too much and not enough tested quality.

[@CuriousCattery]

I'm not disagreeing, but what would the internet have looked like if not driven by profit?

[@jytou]

@@CuriousCattery I think it's all about percentages. Out there, we totally see the positive ways the Internet can be used: it enhances communication around the world in fantastic ways, brings all information at our fingertips in seconds, empowers people with decentralized systems, and so much more. However, when you look at the numbers, an overwhelming majority of its use is pure brain-melting entertainment (think TikTok as the primary example). Overall, instead of pulling us up, it's globally pulling us down collectively, just because, as the OP mentioned, it is primarily driven by profit - which has quite different incentives and goals than the public good. :)

[@FLMKane]

​@@CuriousCatteryhe's not criticising profit he's criticizing stupidity and goldfish memories. I guarantee that the short term profit chasing decisions made in the 2000s have caused long term reductions in profit. Look at the history of Internet Explorer for a good example

[@eric-seastrand]

Where can we find the full interview?

[@Atraydeez]

Is there a longer version of this interview?

[@Kevin-jc1fx]

It all boils down to financial incentive. As long as executives can get working apps at a low enough development and production cost, then it doesn't matter to them that much. People create great languages but in the beginning, it is pointless for developers to learn as there are no job opportunities and very few ressources to learn from and get solutions to eventual issues. As for companies, they won't add it to their stack because of the hardship of getting developers that are proficient in that new language and it creates a vicious circle that keeps that language into oblivion. Unless there is backing from a popular company or you get enough developers really excited about it, it won't take off. JavaScript is now ubiquitous and with such a huge ecosystem, people will need a really strong reason to move away from it.

[@theadityadeshpande]

Agree 100%

[@user-hz1yc6cw6k]

Executives don't choose technologies, it's developers who takes Angular and React for new projects

[@bigfoothines]

I just wish there was a better solution for multithreading in JavaScript... It's pretty awful to use web workers. Something like the goroutine or TBB parallel for would make things much easier and enable far larger projects!

[@Robula]

Use a better language.

[@natewatson1951]

Child processes are a salvageable workaround.

[@jimiscott]

Wasm Wasm wasm

[@gaurdianAQ]

I think this is interesting, because on one hand I do agree with him. On the other hand to make a counter point during those earlier days software/computers hadn't hit the critical mass that they had today, and as others have said the benefits we get are... less drastic. Like I do think we could create a better developer experience, but there are enough people unwilling to try a new language and a lack of interest in supporting said languages.

[@TianmenDream]

I've been struggling with mastering JavaScript for years and it took me so much time to get to know each and every dirty details.

[@alishapayne4121]

well.. he does have a point

[@liftingisfun2350]

​@@etyplt he wants a better language for javascripts uses

[@Saaad2]

@@etypltLOL! looks like you aren't sure what he wants.. he really has good points

[@quanle760]

Yes. But that is not good enough 😂

[@alishapayne4121]

@@etyplt Yes it is unclear but imo he's trying to shake up the status quo and he might be doing it in a sort of "cheeky" manner but that doesn't make it not true. He was a massive proponent and contributor to js in the past (and what I would call a web pioneer in many ways), I think he's trying to instil some of the "inventing" spirit from back then into us now. It's not about having the answer right now but rather about believing it's possible to even start the journey! That turned into a bit of a ramble but I hope you know what I mean. :)

[@MGK734]

I agree.

[@azukifri722]

Really a hard one to remove, JavaScript is in 98% of the website and decades of work wasted on working on this programming language

[@seymourkoop9381]

The only way to remove it is to replace it. I was hoping Douglass would offer a suggestion on what to replace it with, but no.

[@antdx316]

It's a tested and proven language. With new ones, there could be security issues. Adobe Macromedia Flash had the best performance, but of course, the security vulnerabilities weren't good.

[@nivethan_me]

@@seymourkoop9381 lets say Douglass suggested Golang or Rust then what? building the web from scratch?

[@thanhlengoc3805]

@@seymourkoop9381 you can't. If a replacement ever become a movement in the tech industry, it would simply be re-inventing the wheel. For the longest time, "replacement" has always been built on top of older tech, until the older tech become something we take for granted.

[@EricMuyser]

It didn't stop. TypeScript, Rust, Kotlin, Swift, etc. Most devs don't touch the smelly parts of JS anymore. They use TS (+transpiler/bundler). But it's not about the language, it's about the browser embedding support and they aren't doing that. Edit: Yes WASM, but see my reply (TLDR: it needs tighter integration with control over DOM etc. not interfacing with JS)

[@mickmister]

new Date()

[@antdx316]

Just have the ability to use new languages as an embed.

[@asiacuisine4869]

Typescript is basically Javescript. Lolll

[@EricMuyser]

@@asiacuisine4869 Except that it isn't, in the sense that it's an evolution that protects you from a lot of the cruft in JS, like the "weird type comparisons" we all know. Further, the world of TS+WebPack is a far cry away from raw JS.

[@asiacuisine4869]

​@@EricMuyser It is the same ecosystem, runtime.

[@xtremelinux]

My job depends on javascript BUT I would follow crockford and his advice any day. The last real language developers and creators were the last generation. Everything that he just said here resonated 30+ years of history.

[@Tony-dp1rl]

Once things get well adopted and shown to work, the reason to change has to be compelling. None of the new languages provide a compelling enough reason to change. Go is great (for example), so is Rust ... but CPU is not the bottleneck for 90% of developers (and if it was, scaling is cheap), so there is no incentive to change from well supported tools. Javascript is essentially SQL now, it isn't going anywhere for the same reasons SQL isn't going anywhere. We should have better clothes too ... but everyone still wears jeans. :)

[@zhamed9587]

golang is not a good language

[@tetrabromobisphenol]

The crappy performance of most web applications is absolutely a compelling reason to change languages going forward. Rust doesn't just solve CPU usage issues, it just makes everything about a program or application far more reliable. No language is perfect and solve everything, but Rust definitely makes for applications that are intrinsically far more dependable than anything Javascript can produce.

[@stevenharder308]

@@tetrabromobisphenol”intrinsically” dependable? 🙄

[@salamander1782]

Yeah but JS is jeans with holes in it, exposing your junk

[@TravelTom2]

@@zhamed9587 Why? Its developed by one of best engineers....

[@Maaruks]

I use ClojureScript for all my frontend work. There are other excellent options like Elm.

[@GreyDeathVaccine]

Any comments on libraries for ClojureScript? Are they any good? How often do you need to write your own code because there is no library for it?

[@tomwilliam7299]

I totally agreed. Where I can find the full interview?? please 🥺

[@AlessandroBottoni]

Finally, an authorative professional who say an obvious thing: javascript is *unamendable*. It cannot be fixed. It must be replaced.

[@gixxerblade]

JSON not allowing a trailing comma was the biggest mistake.

[@AllanTheBanjo]

Json existing is the biggest mistake...

[@fernandoluna5458]

​@@AllanTheBanjo why?

[@AllanTheBanjo]

@@fernandoluna5458 YAML is a better choice for config, more concise, more expressive, with more data types, less prone to bad syntax with a missing (or extraneous) comma. I For machine machine JSON is just wrong. My client requires JSON on my current project so I have to maintain encode / decode in C++ on the edge and with JS on the cloud. Any change in the structure requires a heap of work. If we were using Google's protocol buffers or ASN.1 for example, the code would all be generated automatically from a clearly defined schema. I'd have a type-safe class to represent the data structure (with support for optional items, debug output etc).

[@fernandoluna5458]

@@AllanTheBanjo Really appreciate your resoning. Thank you!

[@tecTitus]

@@AllanTheBanjo Json is just fine in languages with reflection to automate serialization/deserialization. Use ngenned C# on the edge to stop pulling your hair

[@rhatalos1997]

Browsers became so powerful that we develop web apps, desktop apps, mobile apps and frameworks with JavaScript (TypeScript). I wish there was a way but I just don't see how we can replace JavaScript yet.

[@TechBuddy_]

True Wasm is sooo close yet soo far

[@rhatalos1997]

@@TechBuddy_ Yeah, maybe we need a few more years and then we can slowly get rid of JavaScript

[@PabloSebastianVelazco]

maui?

[@Robula]

Currently writing hybrid apps using html CSS and C#. No JavaScript ❤

[@RM-ep2dc]

@@TechBuddy_ WASM is unfortunately becoming a monster, with extension (wasi) after extension (component model) and incompatibility (wasi again). It will always be soo close yet so far.

[@PaxHominibusBonaeVoluntatis]

Thank you very much for your opinion. I appreciate very much such experienced and knowledgeable man. But what instead of JavaScript which is present in all web browsers around the World? I'm Go programmer and even if I want to compile my sources to WASM then JavaScript seems to be irreplaceable. Could you please expand your vision and give more light on it, what new languages you admire the most and why ?

[@mailjawa]

Whatever said is very true. Do we have any alternative at this point of time?

[@7heRequiem]

I wouldve loved if he actually mentioned specifics such as as drawbacks of JavaScript and what makes it smelly and what he would expect from its replacement or his imagination of what the new evolution of web could be if JavaScript was to be dumped? His reasoning is totally understandable but vague and can be applied on a lot of things at least based on this video or snippet if its a part of a larger one!

[@prodevus]

Javascript is a dumpster fire

[@brianmorgan5880]

@@rice83101 I'm the graybeard here. I lived through the "Fortran...C...C++" evolution, and let's not forget Assembly language in the early days because the processors were too darned slow. Javascript was, and still is, a godsend in my opinion. You mentioned '===' and '=='. I guess it had to do with all those years writing Assembly, but I look at '===' as a fast-running '==' since there is no type-checking or coercing. I use it when I KNOW that I'm comparing two things of the same type. If I don't know, then I use '=='.

[@Ihsannurulimansfd]

This keyword, closure, prototype, shallow copy object, equality comparison, var keyword, no data type, JavaScript being a dynamic language, very ugly way to handle inheritance, no access modifier, the way it handles asynchronous tasks that often give unexpected output, ... That's the drawbacks of JS that's came out of my mind while typing this, and there are so much more.

[@rohanmudumba2545]

@@Ihsannurulimansfdthese are all learned things though. A fault of a language should not be it’s learning curve, but ability to implement new features fast.

[@JLRishe]

​@@rice83101 Most people are writing in another language and compiling to JS? I don't think that's true. Do you have a source for that claim? There are tons of people writing ordinary JavaScript and it is a fine language if you know how to use it well.

[@emmakun]

Well, none of the older languages have really been phased out in reality. Banks are still using Cobol and Mainframes, around 90% of the cellphones use Java, and pretty much any kind of hardware uses a flavor of C to do the low level stuff. The real question is why JS has remained so popular for so long?

[@Toulkun]

Because people use internet daily and websites are all on JS and its frameworks-libraries

[@emmakun]

@@Toulkun yeah, but that doesn’t explain JS popularity because most of the people using internet and websites everyday doesn’t even know how to code, so they couldn’t care less what programming language the internet is using the most.

[@Deb_deCoder]

​@@emmakun the reason is people use browser the most among all softwares, google chrome is the most used browser, chrome browser's V8 engine can only understand JavaScript.. that's why JS is so much popular

[@lawrence-dol]

I agree that JS is, emphasis on *is*, a really good language. Surprisingly, refreshingly good. The obvious possibility besides starting over, is to bifurcate with JS 2.0, simply removing all the cruft and reducing the language to the "good stuff", and freezing 1.0. Then the version is indicated in the script tag, and the old stuff continues to run as is, and those wanting to move forward are forced to either separate their code or remove the cruft from their existing code before declaring it to be 2.0. Nobody is forced to rewrite old, working code, only to package 1.0 code separately from 2.0 code. He's right, JS has accumulated cruft; but the solution is not to discard JS, it's to discard the cruft in a tolerably backward compatible way.

[@harrykaradimas857]

So if I understand this correctly if we keep javascript we should also be able to script pages using Fortran?

[@georgebeier3550]

I would love a typed version of javascript that's not full-on TypeScript. Many thanks to Douglas -- his was the first book I read on JS. He imparts knowledge in a no BS, no ego kind of way. I learned a lot from him (and from his linter). For me, I don't do much framework/virtual DOM stuff. Vanilla JS/Jquery works fine for me.

[@collynchristopherbrenner3245]

We can definitely make something better, but the curve for meeting the current best solutions when starting from scratch is just so high, and the current best languages will be the last to be overtaken, which means they will only amass more adoption over time until they are simply no longer feasible for use. Learning curves are tough as well.

[@AleksandarPanov-ec2if]

I could never agree more with what he said. So, so true. And as he said, not just JS, web itself, and a lot of other languages as well can go along...

[@stephenoshaughnessy2279]

We don't need to get rid of JavaScript. The problem is that too many developers got rid of structured programming concepts. Instead, the language has been contorted into endless pretzels of programmer predilections. It has devolved into a chaos of permutated "options". That needs to be cleaned up before you think of starting a new language.

[@dfrontierit2114]

Glad to have been a raw coder and avoided short cuts for 13 years and yet going on

[@someshvarvashisht6726]

I switched back to basics.HTML, JavaScript and CSS for the front end and WAMP stack for the back end. That's All I need.

[@peterkabiru5144]

glad to see your comment, I feel I need to do the same.and leave out all this javascript frameworks that are poping all the time I'm exhausted in trying to figure out how they work...I'm finding it as time wasting instead of focusing on building the project I want with just HTML css and JS..what is your advise

[@Saurabhkumar-bn3dl]

​@@peterkabiru5144Bro you cannot possibly make any real world applications without using those frameworks, it will be so bad that at one point you just cannot keep up with the complexity. It will be terrible. There are so many frameworks out there but they are not all same. Every framkework does things differently. If you want to enjoy and have a good time go with svelte, solids. If you really wanna step up to find a big job go with react and it's superset next. That's all really.

[@kissmeifyouloveme5983]

Use nodejs for the backend

[@Deb_deCoder]

​@@Saurabhkumar-bn3dl I bet you don't know JS properly

[@Saurabhkumar-bn3dl]

@@Deb_deCoder Sure whatever helps you sleep at night.

[@Je3f0o]

Many years ago i start programming in javascript because of his speeches. Then i stop using javascript last 1.5 years. Finally Douglass Crockford himself said stop using javascript. Thank you.

[@ywtcc]

This has been an effect in the industry for a long time now. Once a large number of people have been trained on a language, the amount of economic inertia created is huge. I remember thinking this about C++ in the early 2000s. Maybe more focus should be put on thinking of programming languages as a social norm, and an ecosystem, rather than as a simple technical exercise. Maybe government has more of a role to play. If you could create a cleaner JS that doesn't take much retraining (or has retraining materials built in to complier messages, and an official IDE), I think it would be easier to get adoption up. That way the expertise base is essentially the same size.

[@praveens2272]

What is the alternative. I really hate javascript.

[@okseaj]

Golang

[@praveens2272]

@@okseaj it's a server side programming language

[@okseaj]

@@praveens2272 yeah and JS is pervasive as a server side solution so we can at least stop using it there and use better alternatives

[@ryanleemartin7758]

I believe wasm is answer to this problem

[@-Engineering01-]

​@@okseaj but i have yet to see any go lang jobs in 2rd world countries. Mostly Java, C# and nodejs.

[@user-ni2tn4rk5v]

"It's time for the next thing." Funny enough, this is a core philosophy of the JS community itself. That's why we have so many new frameworks out there.

[@Xaero324]

@ghost mall There's nothing "shaky" about JS... only bad practices. This can be true for many other languages. Everything has it's pros and cons.

[@kitebeachinnbeachinn2888]

@@Xaero324 Reacjs solved a huge problem compared to Jquery but the rest are only reinventing the wheel with a good exception Vuejs.

[@DavidLoveMore]

A large part of the problem is the development philosophy. People are using unstable experimental frameworks in production. We need to make and use finished code.

[@Ian-zj1bu]

​@@kitebeachinnbeachinn2888 are you kidding? I don't think anything has solved more problems in JS than what jQuery did. To unify different browser implementations of rendering stuff to the screen, React sits atop a pile of other useless UI frameworks. Yes, mistakes were made in jQuery, just like everything else made with a computer but to dismiss it's achievements as trivial seems unfair, bordering uninformed. I used to get paid to write JS, then it was React, now it is Vue... it's all just JS. 15+ years after picking up the language, jQuery still holds top spot for me in order or respect, even though I rarely ever use it when engaging in legacy web applications... My advice to anyone reading this, try NativeScript instead of React Native... there's no hype train but it's just better.

[@StSava-zm8tf]

@@kitebeachinnbeachinn2888 You sound like a clueless coding bootcamp graduate. Vanilla and jQuery have everything you need to build a solid frontend. Simple, understandable and easy to debug. React on the other hand is a bunch of abstractions and weird syntax. Difficult to comprehend, debugging is a nightmare.. ends up being a mess of buggy "reusable" components that never get reused.

[@Cactoos]

Im coding in JS and I love it, however I agree with this beautiful man, we can do so much better

[@SusumoKakinotane]

It's just mater of finding/creating a good balance in terms of a solid language with an improved architecture, that's easy to use, and supports most of the modern features that web developers need. Some really good applications like Figma are powered by WASM, but I'm not sure that every web developer would get use to it.

[@opassley]

Evolution should be natural and not forced. Technology has been evolving as has Javascript over time, but I wouldn't want us to do to JS what we did to Flash. That was a shame.

[@Ni7ram]

IT WAS. a shame :(

[@kwhandy]

are you guys ask him which programming lang he used to code recently? just curious

[@WatashiwaWatashi-zw7hy]

I believe he uses Dart right now. bcz I think there's no other languages that is better than Dart

[@gregoryshields4258]

People who are wise are seldom listened to, and business people who know nothing make tech decisions. I still have Crockford videos on JavaScript that I downloaded probably 15 years ago, because he actually taught the language fully.

[@nexusyang4832]

the problem comes down to cost of maintenance and upgrade. once the plane is in the air and it needs to stay in the air how do you migrate passengers inflight?

[@Kem-OurMessou]

It feels like he actually wanted to say, stop using vanilla Js. Because with all the advantages brought up by the plethora of js frameworks and libraries in constant evolution, JS still has a long lifespan.

[@Berniesf]

That's why Typescript was created to address some of the shortcomings of Javascript. I don't see people stopping using js anytime soon.

[@TitusM7]

Except i still see garbage TS code where everything is messy everything is “any” still as confusing and trash as js code.

[@oscarljimenez5717]

​@@TitusM7 with a simple eslint and tsconfig you can fix that (in my codebases i don't allow any). Sadly you can't be so restrictive with this, because incremental adoption.

[@moestaxx286]

good news bc i am learning the whole javascript ecosystem still😭

[@TitusM7]

@@oscarljimenez5717 true but some people adopt typescript but never let go of the things typescript is trying to fix. We have projects that started with TS and they are absolutely messy, too damn hard to read and work around.

[@MGK734]

Honestly I don't think TS resolved the problem. Yes created new rules for developer and added another level of the complexity, whenever you want to use 3rd party library you need to learn a new type from that library. It's not a solid typed solution IMHO, I rather have to deal with C#. I don't like the possibility of creating types. TypeScript tries to mimic C#, I would just go with C#.

[@stevenhe3462]

What are you going to use for the browser, then? Rust with WASM?

[@yumyum7196]

I really wish he would have mentioned what are the bad points he is referring to regarding the web and OSes. Does anybody know if he dives into that somewhere else?

[@JohnFarrellDev]

Nobocdy cares? People seem hyped on Rust, Go and Zig.

[@erikitter6773]

JavaScript can at least be as dirty as C with the added problem that the vast majority of people writing JS never learned the fundamentals and therefore are not aware of how bad the stuff they tinker with until it just works seemingly is. There are good reasons why your introduction into programming at university is not JS (though it might use some and that I think is actually worthwhile despite students not getting why they should work with 3+ languages right from the start [and aiming for real deep understanding of one {that is not JS}]).

[@C2H6Cd]

I like your nested brackets 😊

[@Coding-to4zj]

there is no dirty about some dom manipulation and http requests and some browser api. you are delusional. take it from someone who wrote a chess engine in c++ and in js

[@Optimus6128]

The web is fucked. Having to work a bit with that side of things, it terrifies me as a desktop developer. At least in the desktop you can chose the language of your liking, but on a web browser you are stuck with one thing (and other layers on top). Is it possible for a change from JS to something else, if also browsers have to be rewritten? I don't know much about web technology to understand if that's the reason we are stuck.

[@albertoarmando6711]

I wonder what are his thoughts on Elm, if he has any. For me, I have been usint TS for the last 4 years. But I'm learning elm for fun

[@EdwinMartin]

It’s true: there is some crap in JavaScript and it can’t be removed because of backwards compatibility. But the great thing is, all the crappy parts have good equivalents. You don’t have to use the crappy parts. When you use modern JavaScript, it’s actually a nice language. JavaScript has features many other languages don’t have. It’s asynchronous, event-driven and has first-class functions. Also, if you want to use types, you can use TypeScript.

[@kusalg]

I have yet to see people be disciplined about that tho.

[@oussama40612]

The problem is we live in a delusion of modern functionalities because once we need to compile it to make it work on most browsers, we get into package/build/NPM/dependency hell

[@nivethan_me]

@@kusalg just setup eslint properly and you'll be fine

[@glenrisk5234]

I remember when Java script came on the scene. I played with it a little. I remember a java applet that enabled you to post a rotation of pictures in a window. it was powerful, dynamic and horrendously unstable.

[@JensBrocher]

Applets are a Java technology, not Javascript. It seems you don't know what JavaScript aka ECMAScript is.

[@glenrisk5234]

@@JensBrocher Apparently not. I thought the script used to access the engine was Java script. That is what it was called at the time, the script you had to define in the page header to be able to use it in the web page. The script that defined how the applet would appear and function. I know the applet itself was not the script used to access it in the engine. But you seem to be saying that Javascript is an entirely different thing, that it is inappropriate to describe the script used to access the Java Engine from a web page as javascript?

[@JensBrocher]

@@glenrisk5234 Correct, although Java and Javascript sound similar, these are 2 completly different and unrelated languages/technologies. People often confuse them because of the naming. This was done intentionally because Java was the No.1 most hyped language when JS came out, and they wanted to ride on the hype train. Before it was called Mocha and LiveScript. The official name is ECMAScript.

[@Mr7Doug]

By the way, what is the language I should replace JS for?

[@nikilk]

Douglas Crockford a legend and a great teacher... I have read his books on Javascript. That something else he speaks about is probably a very evolved version of Javascript.

[@HartleySan]

A completely reasonable, sound and logical thing to believe. Unfortunately, corporations hell-bent on making money won't see it that way.

[@nataliemreow]

Amazing comment.

[@gabrielilisoi8526]

Aha - I remember those old days when a new language popped out pherhaps every 2 years. But in those days we did not have the mass of programmers we have now and we did not have the big tech . These two things create a huge inertia - evolution is slow and getting rid of the past is allmost impossible. Perhaps, is not technically impossible but economically makes no sense For this reason we are still using languages created 30 years ago and my bet is we will continue with them at least for the next coming 2 decades.

[@CemKaanKOSALI]

sound recording is so good. which mic used?

[@GerbenWijnja]

So, what to do? Collectively start using WASM instead?

[@Ccb780]

I don't believe his main audience is the web-based developers responding in the comments rather the people who create the APIs used primarily by these web devs. Another language could interact with the DOM or grab canvas elements but for some reason it's seen as niche. I personally am just happy to see HTML and CSS become robust enough that JavaScript is less necessary as well as more fresh and modernly robust languages release and find some adoption.

[@user-cx8rl2cd2l]

HTML and css programming language 😂😂😂😂😂?

[@Ccb780]

@@user-cx8rl2cd2l no? Nowhere above do I use the word programming at all right?

[@josemaker5252]

​@@user-cx8rl2cd2lHe never uses the word programming. Besides, HTML is now receiving new features that can dictate behavior so that no JavaScript is needed, so it *is* stepping into territory that used to be require complicated programming

[@user-cx8rl2cd2l]

@@Ccb780 html and css are not programming languages! it's not even interpreted code.

[@user-cx8rl2cd2l]

@@josemaker5252 smart ass ! and how will you make me handle the user form on an event in html?

[@HussainFazaal]

There are so many cool, safe, robust languages out there, but I'm in it for the incredible community that keeps pushing the language's limits. I've yet to find such a vibrant community elsewhere. It's typescript today, and it might be another iteration/ evolution or rethink of javascript, but wherever this community goes, I'll follow. For me it's the safest bet.

[@SRG-Learn-Code]

Types are coming to javascript

[@user-manager]

Types are shit. Other languages are shit. Language better than JS is still to be invented.

[@user-manager]

And by "better" I mean the language ergonomics.

[@igordasunddas3377]

@@user-manager what's that exactly?

[@user-manager]

@@igordasunddas3377 That's how much time you spend on understanding the code you wrote last year provided that it was written well. That's generally all about time. Because life is short and nobody seems to care until meet his own death.

[@coolworx]

I just want to thank DC for teaching me all about recursion and closures and currying, and how hoisting worked... And the IIFE!

[@sangkim6338]

it would be nice to know some examples of those 'mistakes in OS, runtime and languages'. Especially the OS part.

[@asagiai4965]

That's sound good but there's a lot of problem with that. 1.) JavaScript is so embedded in our system especially the web. That it is hard to just stop using it. The fact that all browsers are using it. Is what makes it hard. 2.) Where will the people (developers) go? I think it will create more problem. Unless we already have some alternatives that can be use by web browser (or in some case server) that we can use directly. Or else people will be wandering around. I think we should stop making JavaScript complicated for now. Only when it really gets bad, and we actually have a solution, then that we should stop using it.

[@kopiking352]

my programming role model and taught me js 20 yrs ago 😓

[@Honeypotio]

I guess it's a good reminder that you can always change your mind in life 💛

[@cebolinharenato]

What to use intead of javascript for web then?

[@STG113]

I would care to know about the technical specifics, why is js so bad and what are the best options?

[@acrosstundras]

I read that initially Google planned to include Dart interpreter in Chrome, but that plan was quickly scrapped. Maybe that would've been a solution.

[@kelvinsanyaolu4899]

Dart sucks

[@acrosstundras]

@@kelvinsanyaolu4899 why?

[@ryanleemartin7758]

Yeah, I think they ran into the same problem every other javascript replacement to date ran into ... the web's immune system rejected a rogue vm . The best option is wasm which will just make JS less important by relegating it to just another language option

[@Robula]

​@@kelvinsanyaolu4899Then you're part of the problem.

[@EdouardTavinor]

I quite like dart as a language. It's like the understandable bits of typescript without the legacy JavaScript stuff. It still compiles really well to JavaScript, so you can write web sites with it. JavaScript to me is like assembly. Yeah, you can write software with it, but it's probably best not to. Typescript is like assembly with some macros.

[@nidodson]

For this to happen, browsers have to improve and support better languages.

[@a-yon_n]

If there are such languages. The language a frontend application runs must be interpreted at run time, something you can type and run in the integrated REPL, I don’t see there is any other language thare can compare to JavaScript.

[@scottanderson2871]

@@a-yon_nwhat????

[@caleyCodeLab]

I clicked on this video thinking this was going to be trash, but I totally agree. I'd be really awesome to see some inovation here

[@lmk5061]

What is the new language that you suggest?

[@ijazkhan3335]

Agree with some of his points. They are now pushing ESM based moduling in node projects, but so many 3rd party libraries just don't seem to accept it. Also, the typescript/javascript choice is also quite often misused. I looked at one fullstack node project. It contained both TS and JS files because it was using an ORM that does not support typescript fully out of the box. Golang is a cleaner language. It's simple, may not have too many features like Java and Dotnet, but is simply a fun to work with in Backend intensive applications.

[@igordasunddas3377]

The issue is, that enterprises don't care about "fun to write" languages. They care about MVPs and squeezing the last bit of benefit, even short term, out of a deal. They often don't even care about tests and the likes, which is why I never make it transparent whether I am writing tests or implementing code - it's all implementation and is made visible as such. The thing with JavaScript is, that you can find many more people writing JavaScript or TypeScript from a HR point of view than Golang developers. In Enterprise environments it therefore often doesn't matter what language is best, but what's the one that is the most widely spread while somewhat getting the job done. I'm not saying it's cool, but a new language shouldn't just be equally as good, but MUCH better in order to justify the small amount of developers able to use it.

[@uhxcz]

he got a point but i don't think really need create a new languages is totally possible renew the olds and languages always will get problems and bugs exploits.

[@aymanelhasbi5030]

what are thoses issues ? what is the flaws in the web and what are the flaws in the operating system ? does anyone has anyidea ?

[@faridguzman91]

I absolutely abhor js and want to stop using it really quick, i would wanna start my own saas using something else and start a new ecosystem from scratch

[@GiantsOnTheHorizon]

I’m pretty hopeful about Mojo as a new language (still in beta I believe). The developer, Chris Lattner, is a badass. It’s worth watching his last 2 Lex Fridman podcasts to see where it’s going. Most powerful and exciting language probably ever made and it uses Python syntax.

[@mohammadhassan1649]

Lol

[@GiantsOnTheHorizon]

@@mohammadhassan1649 why is that funny? If you're focusing on the Python they simply use the Syntax and not the interpreter. It's a completely new animal but, you can use your Python skills to run it. Anyway, just remember this when you're either developing in it in a few years or wishing you could.

[@Hytpu9]

@@GiantsOnTheHorizon why r u so agressive man -_-

[@Ni7ram]

well i loved swift, so i put my bets on this guy

[@GiantsOnTheHorizon]

@@Hytpu9 if you thought that was an aggressive comment I wish you well in the world.

[@billybob1620]

Crockford is great… I saw him …almost 20 years ago at a conference introducing json and it blew my mind

[@wanderingfido]

The browser and browser version factory I tried to build and use became a continually moving target. The HTML featureset would also widely vary. Very annoying.

[@kosnowman]

JavaScript will be here to stay unless browsers treat it as a second citizen to favour a particular language or let WASM takes over. People still use JavaScript not because it is evolving or getting types from TypeScript (enjoy the setup process), but because it is the only most convenient choice to do all the magic in the browser, WASM is great but does not directly manipulate the DOM, every browser has a JS engine unless a browser or all browsers treat JS as a second citizen or WASM able to directly manipulate the DOM without a layer of JS, JavaScript is here to stay, and it has to evolve better.

[@Dev-Siri]

I don't think the problem here is really JavaScript itself, but the way the web platform is & its starting. On the web, any feature once added will stay forever. Many of JavaScript's early bad design decisions are frozen in time & its impossible to make the language & its runtime better when you gotta support all the crap it has generated in the 1990s & 2000s. And the language was always kind of seen as an "irrelevant tech that would be DOA" in the 90s, especially considering how much Microsoft hurt its development while trying to push its JScript or whatever trying to take over the internet. And now after all the damage from the early days, we have Microsoft itself inventing a language (TS) and monopolizing the web development world with the now damaged JavaScript with all the bad design decisions becoming "something not scalable & to avoid".

[@MelroyvandenBerg]

Yea stupid Microsoft

[@m.m3633]

Yes, it was Microsoft being the cancer.

[@oneminutecoder]

[@DarkmoonUK]

No, the problem is JavaScript itself. It's objectively a bad language that became popular by being in the wrong place at the right time. A language that doesn't even support integer numbers!? Come on...

[@Potato_Quality7]

@@DarkmoonUK What do you mean, it doesn't support integer numbers?

[@ameerachannel1667]

i hope someone would make javascript to c or c++ transcoder so i can creat games in other language without the need to learn it.

[@Landon_Hughes]

I prefer a low or no JavaScript approach to web dev. Django + HTMX + Alpine is all I need. I don't need React, Solid, Vue, Ember, Angular, Marko, Remix... for a simple CRUD app. 🤷

[@GreyDeathVaccine]

PHP guy here. But I completely agree with your opinion on HTMX and Alpine. They complement each other perfectly.

[@aaditkamat4995]

I think this is particularly evident in the way web apps are developed using npm. One of the main reasons debugging these apps is such a pain is because the npm ecosystem is broken. The apps are bloated with a lot of dependencies stacked one on top of the other and you are thrown errors sometimes that take days to triage. Other languages like Java and Python seem to be less afflicted by such problems. The wide spread adoption of JavaScript makes it hard to supplant the language. TypeScript gets around the duck typing quirks, but it’s not sufficient.

[@ydoomenaud]

I solved this problem by not using npm in the first place

[@aaditkamat4995]

@@ydoomenaud I have been using yarn, but the problems persist. What do you use for web development then?

[@yvrelna]

My package manager is to just use the bloody tag 😂

[@aaditkamat4995]

@@yvrelna yeah that’s one way. But I think as the site gets bigger, fetching all of these dependencies through CDNs increase site latency substantially.

[@doc8527]

we live in different spectrum I guess, I personally rarely had critical issues with npm/pnpm, yarn, you can name it. It's simply because I used open source lib, I also created and maintained OS libs, hence I pretty much had an idea why some of quirky issues we have. So I hardly agree your point that "web apps suffer by npm" but it made sense from a user perspective. In fact, when I used other languages, their package management system/tooling/docs are so bad that the dev experience is not even close to JavaScript ecosystem. I assume that partial reasons are that javascript is so BAD, yes it's so bad that :P forces the js devs further polishing a lot of JS libs/tools to make up the difference. Goes back to the original video, I do agree with that web devs nowadays shouldn't waste their time on JS to fix those issues, we should look for something better. Maybe a better web language, like rust? However, it might come with an "adaptation cost" (not migration cost but developer adaptation pain) and a period of degradation, if any new performant languages that has a high learning barrier that can easily trap developers into making subtle mistakes. Even though the language is widely adopted, we might have a worse UX in general because most new web apps with that language will likely be built terribly that perform far worse than using JavaScript. The reason I said that it's because in the past few years a lot of terrible React apps were built that is still using the mindset of MPA instead of SPA, or abusing useEffect, do jquery way dom manipulation in react app, do rendering during animation, do JavaScript manipulation instead of using CSS because they get used to do everything in javascript in React. They are so bad that they should stick to their old jquery php setup instead of doing migration for the sake of market/technical trending.