top | item 34947898

The Vanilla JavaScript Toolkit

56 points| favourable | 3 years ago |vanillajstoolkit.com

23 comments

order
[+] s1k3s|3 years ago|reply
I've been using a lot of vanilla JS recently, as I've decided not to go for the usual React/Vue etc stuff. I'm mindblown by how much functionality they added in vJS, and I keep discovering new stuff on MDN every day. I suggest to everyone who's looking for frameworks/libraries for a certain task to check MDN first, as the implementation might be already present in the core!
[+] lockhouse|3 years ago|reply
Similarly, you can get surprisingly far with just vanilla HTML and CSS these days. You might not even need JS for certain web apps.
[+] krono|3 years ago|reply
http://vanilla-js.com/

> Vanilla JS is a fast, lightweight, cross-platform framework for building incredible, powerful JavaScript applications.

Not entirely relevant or particularly useful but never gets old

[+] runlevel1|3 years ago|reply
The latest generation of engineers will be spared the pain of searching for how to do something in JavaScript and only getting answers involving jQuery.

Though that was probably more of an indictment of the lacking state of JS in those days than it was anything else.

[+] anon23432343|3 years ago|reply
The first thing I see is a big ad for a newsletter...

At least try to charm me with some good stuff and then ask for my mail...

[+] bdcravens|3 years ago|reply
The pages in the site have a lot of value; each page does have an email signup form at the bottom. The entry page on the site probably needs a little bit more content (like explaining the methods and libraries pages, etc) to feel a bit less like a landing page.
[+] thdc|3 years ago|reply
I saw the header immediately followed by the newsletter sign up and initially thought that there was content in between those two sections that failed to load.
[+] kasajian|3 years ago|reply
It's very clear he's looking for engagement. He submitted last back in December, too. The podcast has only been around a few months. Like dude, give it a rest. Allow stuff to build organically, too; word of mouth.
[+] skeletal88|3 years ago|reply
I wish that Javascript was a proper language that included a Date type that was actually useful, and came with batteries included (like Python for example) so you could do something useful with it without having to find the latest popular library to do something with it.

I also wish that there were other languages running on the browser. Today JS is only popular because it has no competition.

[+] duncan-donuts|3 years ago|reply
Basically every language has been competing with JavaScript for at least a decade. Maybe even two decades. Tons of languages target the JS runtime, there have been countless languages that are syntactic sugar over JS, and dozens if not hundreds of attempts to build a browser dev experience that was better than JS. The only continuity is that JS is still around and well. And this is all just recent stuff. What about the attempts for other languages supported in the browser from 20+ years ago? People have been competing against JS for as long as JS has existed. The reality is JS is really useful
[+] s1k3s|3 years ago|reply
I'm curious, what features do you find useful in Python (to call it "batteries included"), that you can't find in JS?
[+] Polarity|3 years ago|reply
is it still common practice to use "var"?
[+] umvi|3 years ago|reply
I think "let" and "const" are preferable
[+] dgb23|3 years ago|reply
I don’t see a good reason to use it. When I want to change a value later I use let at the top of the appropriate block, otherwise const. The code reads nicer that way.
[+] Tade0|3 years ago|reply
No, but it's still useful in those rare instances in which you really need broader than block scoping.
[+] edflsafoiewq|3 years ago|reply
No, var should never be used.