this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2023
66 points (100.0% liked)

Programming

13376 readers
1 users here now

All things programming and coding related. Subcommunity of Technology.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] _cnt0@lemmy.villa-straylight.social 1 points 1 year ago (10 children)

You forgot to read the very small fineprint after the rant hyperbole: *) true for desktop applications. You could go with C++ and QT. Though, writing C++ code is never easy/fun (still better than JavaScript, though). Any argument about natively compiled multi platform GUI applications regarding mobile is moot either way for multiple reasons. The angle I'm going to push here is: Everybody and his mother tries to push their custom iOS and Android apps, relegating web sites to the desktop. Any multi platform GUI toolkit with a cross-compilable language will give you twice the functionality in half the development time over HTML+CSS+JavaScript. And don't get me wrong: I'm not really suggesting that websites have no place. And there are good reasons to want websites. I'm trying to paint a picture what a horrible absolute clusterfuck the web GUI technology stack is.

[–] rambaroo@beehaw.org 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Any multi platform GUI toolkit with a cross-compilable language will give you twice the functionality in half the development time over HTML+CSS+JavaScript.

Hundreds of companies have tried to solve this exact problem for years and already did the cost/benefit analysis. It turns out that writing almost all of your code exactly once is cheaper than doing it in the multiple stacks that would be required with whatever your dream architecture is. They are not idiots just because you want them to be.

You sound like someone with zero practical experience in this area who just wants to rant about code purity. The rest of us are trying to get shit done while you pine for a perfect technology stack that will never exist.

[–] _cnt0@lemmy.villa-straylight.social 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Hundreds of companies have tried to solve this exact problem for years and already did the cost/benefit analysis. It turns out that writing almost all of your code exactly once is cheaper than doing it in the multiple stacks that would be required with whatever your dream architecture is.

Right ... that must be why no website ever is trying push their mobile app on me, and why all complex software for developing, video and graphics editing, CAD, ... is implemented on web stacks.

You sound like someone with zero practical experience in this area [...]

You sound like someone who's replacable by ChatGPT.

[...] who just wants to rant ~~about code purity~~.

At least you got that (partially) right.

The rest of us are trying to get shit done [...]

Exactly my point: all you get done in web stacks is shit. And the trying is spot on: what do you really expect to come out the other end when the input is shit?

[...] while you pine for a perfect technology stack that will never exist.

I don't even have to do that, though improvements never hurt. Just take any C-Style language other than JavaScript or any other dynamically typed abomination of a scripting language, and you're bound to be happier and more productive.

[–] bradmoor@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Complex software for developing, video and graphics editing, and CAD all have very capable web stack counterparts to the usual desktop applications. vscode, Canva, photopea, onshape, etc

Sounds like something a web developer would say. Don't kid yourself; none of these play in the same ballpark as proper desktop applications they try to imitate. Saying otherwise is as cringe and sad as linux fanboys suggesting GIMP was a fully featured alternative to and on par with Photoshop. And I say that as a linux user who loves to use GIMP for hobby graphics editing since ~25 years.

load more comments (6 replies)