Hacker News Reader

Comment by spenczar5 | Hacker News Reader

Frankly, I think browser compatibility is one of the nastiest, trickiest bits of web development. I'd want to find any way to avoid that sort of thing. The "living standard" model merely describes underlying complexity without resolving any of it, which puts the burden on individual developers. I think we can do better.

View on HN

Feature queries help a lot, but seem to slip under the radar for a lot of developers.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/@supports

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/@media/hove...

> The "living standard" model merely describes underlying complexity without resolving any of it, which puts the burden on individual developers.

Don't blame people when it's their tools that are at fault.

"If you want to teach people a new way of thinking, don’t bother trying to teach them. Instead, give them a tool, the use of which will lead to new ways of thinking."

- Buckminster Fuller

I'm confused. Can you explain which tool is at fault, and for which problem, here?

coding needs to be more automatic

api changes aren't such a big deal

they only seem like it now, because the editor is the primary coding tool

code should be generated from content. roughly speaking:

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_as_data_(disambiguation)

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_generation_(compiler)

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Round-trip_engineering

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-driven_engineering

further, I believe:

> code is unrefactored config

> config is immature content

> content is unrefined code

Reply on news.ycombinator.com