Open full view…

Frameworkless JavaScript

Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:40:38 GMT

Wayne Seymour
Sun, 02 Feb 2014 01:57:54 GMT

After reading your post and interacting on this page, I'm am willing to bite. Besides, I hate following the crowd. it software, religion, politics, etc. it's not that the crowd is always absolutely incorrect. But I like to form my own opinions. So, where to begin?

Courtney Couch
Sun, 02 Feb 2014 02:21:26 GMT

You can read more here: [Follow up blog post - Riot.js]( [Riot release info]( [Github repo](

Wayne Seymour
Sun, 02 Feb 2014 02:30:17 GMT

why thank you! :)

Wayne Seymour
Sun, 02 Feb 2014 02:37:22 GMT

I just got to this line on Riot: , and is the *best pattern for unit tests.* I got into TDD in 2008 and have been hooked ever since. Back to Riot reading...

Yair Even Or
Mon, 24 Mar 2014 17:47:51 GMT

I couldn't agree more with you! It all seems like big conspiracy, people using frameworks like crazy. it feels so wrong.

Wed, 30 Apr 2014 17:21:12 GMT

Should have used ExtJS (combined with sencha touch) in google trends comparisons also... and with the massive decline in jquery mobile...

Fri, 27 Jun 2014 22:24:42 GMT

I'm currently scouring the web for a decent framework, but I noticed you said something and wanted to pass some advice. If you want the two-way binding from Angular without all the extra stuff, knockout is a great framework. It's only 13K and crazy fast in my opinion:

Tero Piirainen
Sat, 28 Jun 2014 05:37:41 GMT

If you read trough all the coments you are definitely not the first one to bring out Knockout :) I totally agree with you. If you want two-way binding without extra stuff Knockout is clearly a better option than Angular. However I personally prefer to build a programming API and send (documented) events for JavaScript presenters. Two-way data binding is another way to build dynamic views and Knockout seems to be a good / minimal choice for that. I just belong to the event camp (aka. backbone.js).

Fri, 25 Jul 2014 20:42:40 GMT

Oh, but I thought jQuery was large too! Is it worth it to you? I'd love to hear how you ended up using it. I do agree that Vanilla JS is the best toolkit :) And the recent fast.js revelation that the side effects of many JS Array methods makes VJS MUCH faster than native (and also works with Typed Arrays, important for my project. It would be nice if Object.observe was in most browsers, would make "binding" that much easier.

Tero Piirainen
Mon, 28 Jul 2014 08:09:19 GMT

jQuery is large. No doubt about it. But it is used by [94.1% of all the websites]( whose JavaScript library we know. It's a safe dependency. I ended up using it roughly 10 years ago when it was in version 1.2. I mainly use it to cover all cross browser issues and it makes DOM manipulation easier.

Tue, 29 Jul 2014 21:17:27 GMT

Unfortunately, software with overheads/delays/bad-performance always wins in the software industry (that's history: Assembly->C-> C++ ->MFC-> .NET -> Javascript). That's because every company wants the best results in the shortest time and usually that kind of software has the ability to provide it. Now, I think Angular is great, even with its large API. And I also think that its API should expand to replace Javascript's broken core functions (because I see Javascript core functions as a pile of obsolete and buggy trash). I am terribly sorry that browsers run Javascript. That's a fail on its own. Fortunately, JQuery makes JS a little bearable but the trash is still there. I am also sorry for the mess of HTML. This is a recipe for failure too (the people that make the standards must be serious alcoholics to produce this trash). There, Angular comes in to save the day. It certainly can't change the way our crappy browsers work, but at least it tries to protect our intellect from this garbage...

Wed, 06 Aug 2014 03:58:23 GMT

changed my mind...

Tero Piirainen
Wed, 06 Aug 2014 05:51:52 GMT

Changed your mind? About what?

Richard Eng
Mon, 03 Nov 2014 01:45:56 GMT

"If you look at the history of frameworks in any programming language, it’s a history of failures." How do you define "failure"? There are popular, long-lasting frameworks actively used to this day in several languages, eg, Struts 2, Spring, Wicket (Java); Django, web2py (Python); CakePHP, Symfony (PHP), just to name 3 languages. These frameworks don't seem to be going away any time soon.

Tero Piirainen
Mon, 03 Nov 2014 06:12:08 GMT

I'm sure you know what I mean with that. There are far more failures than success stories. And your list also looks a bit suscpicious; slightly outdated tools that will eventually fade away since there are already "modern" alternatives available.

Tero Piirainen
Thu, 22 Jan 2015 10:47:53 GMT

[Riot 2.0 is out!](/riotjs/) This is large rewrite brings custom tags for all browsers starting from IE8. Think React + Polymer, but squeezed into 2.5K. It's a full stack with virtual DOM, "reactive views", router and observable.

John Allen
Thu, 22 Jan 2015 17:19:10 GMT

'3.5 years to build Moot' - r u serious?

Janne Lehtinen
Thu, 22 Jan 2015 20:53:51 GMT

> @resolution1441 > 3.5 years to build Moot' – r u serious? Absolutely. There are multiple reasons for why it took that long, speed, scalability and (apparent) simplicity of the UX being some of them. There's a blog entry about this called [You spent 3.5 years on this??](

Gerard Sans
Mon, 06 Apr 2015 20:22:23 GMT

Are you recommending then using YOUR framework then? That's not exactly framework less, is it? =)

Nicholas Johnson
Thu, 17 Dec 2015 11:44:38 GMT

This is absolutely the correct way to handle this. If you're embedding JavaScript into someone else's site, you can't go chucking Ember in there, or Angular, or even Backbone. You've built some simple MVC, it's enough. That's not to say frameworks are bad, just not here.

last page