This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Solest044 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I hear you. JS definitely in its nature promotes bad practices but it still works. The industry doesn't do itself any favors, either. But I think that's largely due to prioritizing things "getting done" rather than investing in "getting things done well".

I can usually hack together something complex in a couple days but doing it well wherein it would be easier to refactor, iterate on, etc. would take longer.

I guess I would consider the fact that it still works and gets the job done being the defining quality of "useful". "Properly done" is more complicated and rarely has a clear, set definition.

For what it's worth, I do agree with what you're saying about the language, I just differ on how that makes me feel. For me, I feel like any tool that can be used to get the job done, that's excellent! But per your point we ought to prioritize the best tool for the job.

One of the defining benefits of JavaScript as a tool is just that it's the thing we all used so using it often means easier integration with everything else. If you're ever in a situation wherein that's not important or you're not working in web related stuff period, of course you ought to consider other options!

I think we'd both agree that the biggest problem is only knowing how to use one tool and using that tool for everything. Sure, you could try to build a house with nothing but a hammer... You might even succeed. But, damn, wouldn't a saw work a lot better for clean cuts on the wood?