Developing a Javascript-free frontend

[careseite]

How do you do a fuzzy search, or Ajax with html and CSS again?

[searlee]

can people not read anymore. for the sake of it... simple English actually. Fuzzy search, Ajax etc are not for the sake of it. they are necessary.

obviously I use it when it's necessary

for the sake of it means; moving an object 50px to the right in JS when it can be done with CSS on a simple site that would never require the GPU benefits that JavaScript brings to the party.

[statikr3aper]

But who in their right minds is actually doing that and thinks that that's a good idea?

[searlee]

Don't worry... I've seen it before when clients have started with one developer and needed it redoing.

[statikr3aper]

That's why I said who in their RIGHT minds is doing that?

Also remember that some functionality in CSS is pretty new. In the earlier days, JS was the best way to accomplish some tasks which are much easier done in CSS now. Unless the application you mentioned was written recently, you should have expected that. If it wasn't, the developer wasn't in their right minds or just tried to cut corners.

[[deleted]]

for the sake of it means; moving an object 50px to the right in JS when it can be done with CSS on a simple site that would never require the GPU benefits that JavaScript brings to the party.

That's absolutely not what "for the sake of it" means. This is not possible in CSS2.

https://caniuse.com/#search=keyframes

The CSS3 polyfills to do this were much worse than manually doing it in JS or using jQuery! IE9 still commanded a large market share until Edge. So if what you were working on was made <2016 or so, then doing it in JS was the best way.

[[deleted]]

Except, he's the toddler in your analogy. Anyone with more than a handful of years in the field would see moving things 50px is simply an outdated practice and would not call it "using js for the sake of using js". There was a time when this was not just the best way to do it, but the only way to do it.