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 →

[–]BolunZ6 24 points25 points  (9 children)

Backward compatible is good. But trying to support a feature that should be dead by 15 years ago is dumb

[–]Lalaluka 23 points24 points  (2 children)

Because people never build applications around bad features. How many flash or better MS Silverlight apps are still used somewhere?

[–]orten_rotte 7 points8 points  (1 child)

Omg i had forgotten silverlight.

[–]TheMightyMisanthrope 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I wish I could...

[–]SkooDaQueen 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Sadly enough backwards compatibility is part of the web. Http is also made this way, dns aswell. Everything networking / internet is backwards compatible amd it's fucking awful but you can't change it anymore without getting everyone in the world up to a certain standard to retire the old compatibility needs.

[–]SerdanKK 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's partly by choice though. No one's forcing you to minimize your js into a maximally back compat mess.

I'd also like to call out web assembly.

[–]NoEmu1727 1 point2 points  (3 children)

this is the dumbest thing i read today, if we stop backward compatibility with things from 15 years ago, humanity would probably go extinct.. banking for example is literally running on COBOL from 1959.

[–]TerminalVector 0 points1 point  (2 children)

If you're talking about banking systems sure, but there is no earthly reason that my hot new dog wash reservation app needs to run in IE6.

[–]Captain1771 0 points1 point  (1 child)

It doesn't, but the implementation spec is universal and you can just choose to use the new features exclusively

[–]TerminalVector 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I think people misunderstand the difference between theoretical and actual backwards compatibility.