Websites have evolved back to static HTML/CSS/JS files

Re:Websites have evolved back to static HTML/CSS/JS files by scoutt on Monday March 09, 2020 @09:18AM (#22525086)

> "The boring solution has a long list of inconveniences and uglinesses that everyone knows about. If we chose the new solution, nobody would know where the bugs are and we can have exciting new ones."

Is this C vs Rust again? (it's a joke, but go ahead, downvote).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Websites have evolved back to static HTML/CSS/JS files by pjc50 on Monday March 09, 2020 @10:43AM (#22525750)

Oh, it's practically general purpose life advice. You could even apply it to some people's second marriages.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Websites have evolved back to static HTML/CSS/JS files by jkoudys on Monday March 09, 2020 @10:01AM (#22525385)

Rust is great, but it's so young that even the ugliness we knew about from a couple months ago is better known than the ugliness of today. The latest stabilisation of async/.await has me hard at work forgetting all the pre-futures-0.3 stuff I'd learned.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Websites have evolved back to static HTML/CSS/JS files by wilg on Tuesday March 10, 2020 @09:29PM (#22542029)

I have a hard rule to downvote whenever anyone asks to be downvoted or complains about being downvoted. Enjoy!

[ Parent | on HN ]