If you ever need column name autocomplete, writing an UPDATE statement and changing it after is an ok workaround.
It would probably be a tough change to push through for the standard committee... a great one for users though, even if it takes 10+ years until you can use it in production.
I had not seen that, thank you. The compilation being optional, backwards compatible, and producing readable / step-debuggable JS seems like a really nice approach.
I think that arch is the best and I've used it for low interactivity projects where the frontend is almost all display. Haven't tried it for complicated SPAs with lots of DOM interaction though.
Do you have any such experience? How do you architecture your models, events, processing, updating, etc? Do you have UI-less component-like pieces of code that you can compose? Or a fat root state manager that does everything?
Not sure if you work on any public repos, would love to have a look if you do for inspiration :)
One of the great qualities of react is to not be compiled, which removes an entire layer of confusion. It's a tradeoff but it is makes it a lot more predictable.
Personally, I like the way react is balanced. Yes, it can feel unintuitive or complicated to beginners, but that's because it puts a lot of emphasis on experts productivity and ergonomics while only using js, not being compiled.
Once you do things the "react way" (whatever that means, you'll get there if you take time to identify and eliminate "smells"), it just feels so... smooth? You can build everything with the same methodology and flow. Simple components can feel a bit over engineered, but the hard ones ones feel much simpler than they would be in other stacks, and upgrading code and functionality feels effortless.
To many people, backend and infrastructure work is sexy. They would happily get their hands dirty and spend insane amounts of time debugging mind-boggling issues as long as they happen server-side.
Frontend work on the other hand is not, it seems. Maybe that's because the biggest problem of high quality frontend development is to figure out how to deal with users (who most deveopers seem to abhor), and how to navigate the, say... complicated circumstances that are browsers.
Maybe building something that has to work in an environment you can't control is just a little too stressful for most devs?
Personally I really don't care. I love doing great architectural work, but in the end I'm all about expertise and I don't discriminate. If I have to step-debug inside webpack plugins or understand Safari CORS handling quirks, so be it. I'm a software engineer, but to me sexiness is in relentlessly looking for an edge, happy customers and signed contracts.
I very much doubt this was intentional. If this was a small company targeting unsavvy users to try and upsell them something, sure. In this case the payout might be worth the fallout once people inevitably figure it out.
In this case, I doubt someone thought "hey, let's mess with Linux users and serve them a bunch of garbage, it'll encourage them to move to Windows".