Ask HN: Anybody still writing JavaScript that does not need to be transpiled? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Anybody still writing JavaScript that does not need to be transpiled?

2 pointsoneweekwonder7 comments

I enjoy writing js code that does not need transpiling. To achieve this I do rely on underscore, backbone, jquery; yes in 2018. It also mean I just have to ctrl+r my browser to run things.

To minify my code I use Google Closure Compiler. Because I dislike the npm toolchain.

But I do wonder if I should not "get with the times".

Also I don't actually know where to start if I want to use a "modern" web framework. Because one is spoiled for choice and they move fast.

I actually want to invest time into the Google Closure Library or another more established/old framework eg, dojo, ember, or even OpenUI5. Is that taking a step back?

Currently my relative advance web app ways in at 1.4 MB(app and libs) which gives you spreadsheet like editing and filtering(slickgrid ftw) with crud ui's generated from json-schemas.

So I want to ask the HN community: Am I alone in the way I think?

edit: I don't want to be a front-end dev, unfortunately it is a necessary evil for webdev atm.

For any given project, I aim to use the simplest tool possible. This means vanilla JavaScript/jQuery and straight CSS unless there's a reason to make the project more complicated.

(But modern browsers support a lot of ES6 without transpiling, so if legacy browser support is not needed I do use ES6 features.)

When I do need to use a framework, i choose Vue.js, because it is the most flexible and does not require transpiling.

> i choose Vue.js, because it is the most flexible and does not require transpiling.

Thanks moved it up my list to look into.

Not alone in the least. I'll give both the pros and cons of this to my eyes.

pro: I keep my side project work _aggressively simple._ I want tech stacks that don't have complex/hard to maintain build systems, dev environments, or toolchains. I want to be able to spin up a new dev env in a matter of minutes and without needing to remember what nonsense I put together and at what versions and etc etc. My goal in my side work is to get right to the point of Building Things with minimal overhead; and it's a constant balance of avoiding adding additional complexity without being too resistant to new tools/techniques.

Con: "I miss typescript." I use it at work, and I find it makes coding in JS _significantly_ more effective and less error prone. I think for my next big project I'd definitely utilize it. (This is actually the only really glaring thing I find myself wanting for, even on old-style angular there aren't "significant friction points" enough to motivate me to upgrade yet.)

> I want tech stacks that don't have complex/hard to maintain build systems, dev environments, or toolchains.

I need to confess it is 90% of the fun.

> Con: "I miss typescript." I use it at work,

I like the idea of typescript, but I'm adamant on no transpiling.

You're not alone. When I do small projects, I much prefer the approach you describe. My skills are mostly on the back end, and I find it more efficient to work with older tech. JQuery and JQueryUI are fine for many projects.

What mvc pattern or library do you use with $?

None.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com