That’s the problem. It’s not JavaScript. It’s not any part of the ECMA standard, it doesn’t work in runtimes other than node (read: the browser) yet it lives in the .js files making them not truly JavaScript. You have split the language.
The syntax isn’t part of the language and was designed in such a way that it cannot be polyfilled. This lead to a thousand packagers that would not be necessary at all if a sane syntax had been chosen. The creator of node himself has said making node incompatible with the browser was one of his biggest mistakes.
https://medium.com/@imior/10-things-i-regret-about-node-js-r...
> There are also countless boilerplate project with webpack setup already so you can get reference from there.
That’s literally the other problem! People just copying boilerplate without understanding it. That’s not a proper solution. That’s not a maintainable project, that’s copying other peoples homework and getting yourself in over your head.
Well I can understand it. As I've used the previous generation of jQuery, knockout, etc, nodejs and it's tooling makes things easier to scale, even with bigger overhead cost.
EDIT:
> That’s literally the other problem! People just copying boilerplate without understanding it. That’s not a proper solution. That’s not a maintainable project, that’s copying other peoples homework and getting yourself in over your head.
Copy, make it run well, modify, learn is how I learn things. Without working example, it's magnitude times harder to learn something. The fact that people copy and use without trying to understand things is their fault, not the hundreds of boilerplate code.
Uh what? It's literally the name itself "node"_modules, it's designed to be used with node. The fact that it use same language and can later be used by browser is another matter. Thankfully we can easily bundle the whole thing using webpack nowadays.
There are also countless boilerplate project with webpack setup already so you can get reference from there.