Echo JS 0.11.0

IMO, one of the main reasons companies are reluctant to use Vue is because there's just one man behind it, Evan You. And that's not actually correct as there's an ever-growing community around it, but the concept is that's opposed to React and Angular which are backed by giants.

Having something like Facebook and Google means support and commitment, and that's what companies often look for. Companies that don't understand that it's 2017, I mean.

But who knows, Vue can still be king. We have a remarkable champion of this phenomenon: jQuery. It wasn't just John Resig, it was a huge community that grew over time and made it a tool prime for business applications.

But then again, its main contenders (like Prototype, Ext, ...) were dwarves in comparison to Facebook. I still don't know where this will be going, but in my heart I hope there will always be space for ideas from just one brilliant mind.

Isn't it time to ban that douche? Damn.

What I dislike the most is that it makes to my RSS feed.

TypeScript is meant to be an extension of JavaScript. If it implements one of JavaScrpt's features in yet another way, I think it could be a stretch.
Then again, they *could* compile both syntaxes while deprecating the legacy one, I guess. But that would require a new major version (although TS does *not* follow semver).

No mention of the proposed #private properties, hm.

Why should they mention them, though? They're still at stage 2, there's still time to reject them.
But if they'll get to 4, I think it will be time for TypeScript 3.

> 1 === view(prop1Lens, complexObject)

Don't tell me it's a Yoda condition...

Will you just stop with this spam?
You douche.

Well... there goes TypeScript being a superset of JavaScript. This is where the roads separate, I guess, unless TS gets a prompt update.

> we need to allow public fields with the same name.

I'd say there's no such a thing: private properties always begin with a #, while publics ones never do.

Not JavaScript and is that Comic Sans?!

?! Where does this comparison make sense?
Laravel is a fully-fledged MVC framework, where Node is just a JavaScript execution environment. A fair comparison would be between Laravel and Express.

And again, Express is just a barebone router with some template engines, whereas Laravel is a battery-included framework with a service container (as you mentioned), a config manager, a default ORM, a testing library and so on. It's more like Angular in this sense, but for back-end development.

Honestly I have a poor idea why Laravel is shipping with Vue now, since one of the most powerful things in Laravel is indeed the routing system. The choice itself to ship with yet another library - and purely a front-end library on top of that, since it can't be used for SSR - is quite against the current general philosophy to be as minimal as possible.

I'm not sure this comparison makes sense. Although most of the task we define are about bundling stuff, Gulp is a platform for any kind of scriptable task. As such, its contenders are Grunt, Broccoli or npm scrpts, while webpack's are Browserify or Rollup.