Skip to main content

Web Technologies I Need To Learn More About

I like to think I'm a good web developer. Getting here was the result of experience, practice, and constant curiousity. Lately, I've wondered if the passive nature of that curiousity has run its course. The pace and breadth of changing technologies as a web developer can be both breathtaking and overwhelming at times. What do I need to know about WebAssembly, WebGL 2.0, or the differences between Browserify and Webpack?
Do I need to know about any of them at all? How do I learn enough about each just to understand if its something I need to understand even more deeply?
Beginning an effort to make that ever driving curiousity more directed, here's a list of things I don't know enough about, but would like to study better.

Webpack

I know that Webpack can replace Browserify and recently have understood it may replace some (or all?) the ways I use Gulp today.
I don't know if the change would impact more projects beyond the build scripts or how much time or effort would be involved with the change.
I want to know what solid advantages Webpack would bring other than just being "new and shiny". I'm specifically interested in how Webpack can handle non-Javascript assets, and how this might make it easier to isolate collections of componenets that pull in both behavior and styling together.

Redux

I know redux is a novel tool for managing all the data in a React application in a single store, focused on immutable operations that enforce consistent operations on your data to make testing and working with your componenets supposedly much easier.
I don't know some details about how to use Redux, like how to combine multiple components from different sources if they have to share a single giant store.
I want to know if I can introduce Redux into projects without creating a huge learning curve for teammates that may have less interest in the whole ecosystem than I.

Material UI

I know that Material looks clean (at the very least I know it doesn't just look like Bootstrap) and that Material-UI provides an implementation via React and could give me a big boost getting started on building larger applications.
I don't know if Material-UI's reliance on Sass would impose a requirement on me, which might be a problem because we've been a Less shop for years.
I want to know how easily we could use Material-UI as a basis to build collections of styled components for each project, especially how much we can customize Material widgets, build more complex widgets out of them, and style them without mucking with the original Sass.

Web Workers and Service Workers

I know that Web Workers and Service Workers bestow amazing new abilities to web applications and I know a little about the lifecycle of a worker and its communication with the host page.
I don't know anything about Service Workers, other than their building on the foundation the Web Workers laid out.
I want to know more about using Service Workers to control offline support, caching, and optimizing page load times. I'm especially interested in using them to get a handle on long load times on mobile and for larger, complicated Single Page Applications.

Sass and Stylus compared to Less

I know that Less has served me well and been my preferred CSS precompiler for a long time, but that decision and the environment it was made in was a half a decade past. For the same reasons I needed to evaluate and focus on one options then, I need to do the same thing now that the landscape has changed.
I don't know if the comparisons I made between Less and Sass five years ago are still valid today. I don't know how Stylus, the new kid on the block, measures up between them. I don't know if my preference for Less is holding me back because, despite what I'd prefer, its definitely the least popular and the move of Bootstrap from Less to Sass might be a nail in the coffin.
I want to know what might have changed about Sass and how it compares to the evolution of Less over the last few years. More so, I want to learn about Stylus. In the end, I want to figure out if either Sass or Stylus are improvements enough to be worth the effort and pain of jumping ship.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Respect and Code Reviews

Code Reviews in a development team only function best, or possible at all, when everyone approaches them with respect. That’s something I’ve usually taken for granted because I’ve had the opportunity to work with amazing developers who shine not just in their technical skills but in their interpersonal skills on a team. That isn’t always the case, so I’m going to put into words something that often exists just in assumptions.
You have to respect your code. This is first only because the nature and intent of code reviews are to safeguard the quality of your code, so even having code reviews demonstrates a baseline of respect for that code. But, maybe not everyone on the team has the same level of respect or entered a team with existing review traditions that they aren’t acquainted with.
There can be culture shock when you enter a team that’s really heavy on code reviews, but also if you enter a team or interact with a colleague who doesn’t share that level of respect for the process or…

On Pruning Your Passions

We live in a hobby-rich world. There is no shortage of pastimes to grow a passion for. There is a shortage of one thing: time to indulge those passions. If you're someone who pours your heart into that one thing that makes your life worthwhile, that's a great deal. But, what if you've got no shortage of interests that draw your attention and you realize you will never have the time for all of them?

If I look at all the things I'd love to do with my life as a rose bush I'm tending, I realize that careful pruning is essential for the best outcome. This is a hard lesson to learn, because it can mean cutting beautiful flowers and watching the petals fall to the ground to wither. It has to be done.

I have a full time job that takes a lot of my mental energy. I have a wife and a son and family time is very important in my house. I try to read more, and I want to keep up with new developments in my career, and I'm trying to make time for simple, intentional relaxing t…

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this.


CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer. 
One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC?

It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on. The only re…