>>106139431 (OP)
I am a white man, therefore, I dont use frameworks

If you use jQuery to develop a website in 2025 you are mentally challenged.

>>106139950
Good morning saar. jQuery is good enough for 99% of websites. React is for mongoloids.

>>106139950
or working for the government

>>106139431 (OP)
I like to use vanilla JavaScript and it's not because I like it but I find that I dislike it less. It also encourages you to stop while you're ahead

>percentage goes beyond 100%

>>106139431 (OP)
I'd almost do webdev if I could just use vanila JS, but I feel I'd need to sift through 100's of postings to even find one.

(I'd have no problem calling a hundred numbers and just straight up asking: "Do you use plain JS, y/n?" but you and I both know the answer will be a "Huh?" in 95% of cases, regardless if true or not, so you can't just hang up either.)

Thanks humans, for all that overhead!

It's easier to interpret document.getElementById("element") than mutt-runes like $("#element")

>>106139431 (OP)
I use fixi.js and the "event debouncing extension" for active search. And small amounts of vanilla JS inside of <script> tags when I want to handle state on the client. That's all you need.
https://github.com/bigskysoftware/fixi

Same goes for CSS. There's no need to use Tailwind. Just use vanilla CSS inside of <style> tags. And make sure to keep each initial page load below 14kB after compression to keep it performant.

>>106139431 (OP)
React because it's the easiest to vibe code in. I don't know why asp.net or asp.net core is on there because it could mean a lot of things, and it's current use in the year 2025 is primarily as a backend.

>>106139431 (OP)
svelte

preact

>>106139431 (OP)
Node on backend, React/ next on frontend.
$170k/yr senior dev in an LCOL area.

>>106140807
Node for backend gives me the ick

Google Web Toolkit

>>106140887
You use whatever it is that you have the infra for. In this case it's node. Gets the job done and the company makes just as much as it would on any other backend.

I used to get involved with the stack wars early in my career. Now I just don't care. I get work done and get paid.

>>106139431 (OP)
jQuery chads can't stop winning

>>106140991

Decisions have to be made when picking stacks. Node with TS has come a good way. I find C# to be a smoother experience for server side programming but if most of your devs are already more frontend inclined it makes sense to extend the same language. The biggest thing I dislike about node is how immature its dependency/package management ecosystem and culture is, feels like my shit is going to blow up at any moment.

>>106139431 (OP)
>node.js is not a framework
>jQuery is not a framework
wtf is this list, it makes no sense whatsoever

>>106141021
Nuget has the same risks (as does maven), but there are far fewer people working in .net and thus it doesn't move as fast. I have been a C# dev and a Java dev in past jobs and liked them both, but everything is converging on the same package approach. The main difference is that C# and Java have a much more mature and feature filled core library, where everything in node is built upon packages with a thin core.

It seems in the near future at least, that most development is going to be between python and JS/TS.

>>106139431 (OP)
The biggest lesson I learned as a code monkey is:
just use what's popular
yes, your pet library is better. no, nobody will ever care. don't bother with deno, just use node. don't bother with mercurial, just use git. don't bother with your special snowflake programming language, just brute force everything with JS / Python / C++ / (maybe) Rust.
Want to play around with your dick? Sure, can be fun, but you will never get any benefit out of it. Just use what everybody's using.

tldr node + react + typescript

>>106141095
This. Came out as trans and learned rust and svelte, and there are no jobs. Had to learn Golang and React to get a comfy job. Fuck.

Node is not a framework.

>>106139431 (OP)
This is just a lie and propaganda against vanilla js. It's totally valid code to just refer to an element by its id
<p id="example">text</p>
<script>
example.style.color = "blue"
</script>

And of course you can just make a simple, short lambda for getElementById instead of using a whole bloated framework for what could be achieved in 1 line of code. 99% of frameworks are because people never bothered to learn vanilla js.

>>106141545

The more I work with frontend frameworks the more I realize you really could just roll it all yourself with plain old JS + your own reusable methods. You should be limiting what you do on the frontend anyway. By adding more tooling you encourage more development and functionality on that side of the equation, which is bad.

There's also a misconception that react/vue/angular etc are faster than plain JS, which is false. plain JS is still far and away the lightest and fastest as everything is built on top of it.

>>106141631
I get what you're saying, but that attitude won't get you a job when companies love frameworks

>>106141631
Vanilla JS is good unless you're making a webapp, and everyone wants to make an app. Webpages are for boomers

>>106141631
vanilla for loops are also faster and more efficient than fp stuff like map, reduce, and filter, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't use them.

There's a big difference between optimal code and performance wise and optimal "get shit done" wise. The latter is what pays your bills.

>>106139431 (OP)
I use vanilla js... why the fuck would anyone use jQuery when it literally does not do anything special? I'm always baffled how baby duck and boomer people are.

>>106139431 (OP)
>Spring anything
Jesus Christ please kill it. ASP.NET is less god awful.

>>106141631
The problem is JavaScript sucks and should have been replaced with wasm where frameworks vs "vanilla" wouldn't matter as much since most all optimizing compilers can literally pull magic out of their ass. I'm frankly sick and tired of dealing with js myself, but the cost of js <-> wasm is so dogshit it isn't worth it.

Fix up webidl to allow for wasm linking already. I hate web browsers.