State of the Art JavaScript in 2016
I'm not a fan of these discussions at all. We're all supposed to have been using X framework at X time period. In the enterprise we can't just keep rewriting all the god damn applications.<p>For us contractors, we have to answer to clients we had 2 years ago about why their app is in Backbone.<p>I mean, damn; we have to build software here and we aren't all Facebook. You might get warm and fuzzies from constantly starting over and feeling like you've chosen the right framework, but it's immature.<p>Oh, we got it right this time! React is a paradigm shift! We've quickly forgotten we were saying this with Angular bindings. Oh your model based stuff is crap, this has TWO WAY BINDING, it's a paradigm shift!<p>Now, I'm using Angular. I could recite the Backbone source code, we had a few small libraries and we built huge apps and they worked (and they were built with Grunt and it worked fine, but hey, move it all to Gulp! now! Paradigm shift!). In this case I was expecting it. I waited six months and Web Pack came along.<p>We're going to go ahead and build our app in Angular 1.x with TypeScript and Web Pack and test it with Jasmine.<p>This article is NOT correct. This hasn't been 'decided', there is no clear winner. You can't simply list the features of something as "amazing" and "where it's at". You are arguing finality here and you main data point is "coolness factor". It's not correct, it's not objective, and it isn't high quality, long term; well thought out software development practice.