It's definitely not perfect (and definitely not a replacement for web apps) but I think it's a big step in the right direction for GUI development. People have made impressive programs with it.
Yet Markdown languages are far, far more limited in both scope and functionality than HTML is. How do you bridge this gap without making it just as complex?
That's a really big topic but in general I'd combine theming and markup to one language (not necessarily coupling CSS and HTML in one file but having something that does both with similar syntax and rules), make things simpler so there's one clear way of doing something rather than using a generic container for everything, etc.
No matter what you propose, unless it’s 100% absolutely perfect (and nothing ever is) you’ll end up in the same situation.
Obviously deprecating a few things will happen over time but the reason web dev is how it is now is because technology used to be a lot more limited and websites were a lot simpler. 25 years ago, nobody knew what the "modern web" would look like so it was made up as people went along. We know what specifications we would need now if anybody went back and re-did them, I think you'd end up with something better.
People say the same about no-code frameworks. There’s a good reason that stuff doesn’t work beyond the absolute basics.
I don't think they're comparable. You won't use a GUI and drag-and-drop for everything obviously, you'd still be able to add sections with code.
The fact that Wordpress powers almost half the internet is proof that a simpler web dev experience like this is in demand and it can work. Most websites don't need something complex, just something that supports rapid development and is intuitive, and doesn't make it easy to fall into bad practices. Like I said, it's a hot take, but I would prefer it so much this way.
No, how is it?
Web development feels like it's stuck in the early 2000's. I've ranted a lot about it over the years but I just don't know how everyone is okay with it. I'm sure tons of people will disagree.
HTML is bad. The language itself feels unintuitive and is clunky compared to modern markdown languages, and let's be honest, your webpage just consists of nested <div> tags.
CSS is bad. Who knew styling can be so unintuitive and unmanageable? Maybe it made sense 25 years ago, but now it's just terrible. It's very clunkily integrated with HTML too in my opinion. Styling and markdown should be one easier to use language where 50% of it isn't deprecated.
Javascript has been memed to death so I won't even go there. Typescript is OK I suppose.
And now for my hottest take: ~10+ years ago I saw web building tools like Wix and I completely expected web development to head in the direction using a GUI to create, style, and script from one interface, even allowing you to create and see dynamic content instantly. I've seen competitors and waited for "the big one" that's actually free and open source and good enough to be used professionally. It never happened. Web dev has just gone backwards and stuck in its old ways, now it's a bloated mess that takes way more time than it deserves.
The Godot engine is actually a pretty good option for creating GUI apps and it's exactly what I envisioned web dev should've been this past decade. One language, intuitive interface, simple theming and easy rapid development... Shame it never happened.
I've used Defold very briefly but it's definitely a polished, well-done engine. Would recommend.
I hope the rumors are false. Hasn't hollywood ruined enough franchises by now? At the very least give us a remaster of the original trilogy, they're timeless masterpieces.
I'm also in a 3rd world country and I'm struggling to break into the field. I'm currently making freelance educational webgames which is a pretty fun gig and pays decently but I haven't reached a single interview for a full-time gamedev job from the start of this year. There are barely any gamedev companies where I live, and the few that do exist are usually gimmick companies that trick old investors. There's a lot of VR/AR companies that have yet to produce a single game but keep talking about how it's the future and need funding.
You would think the boom of work from home would mean I can find a remote job but every one of them is either "We need 5+ years of experience" or "You have to live in the US or EU to be accepted". Doesn't help that everyone I know is begging me to get a real job™ because I would land a software engineering job easily.
I'm not deterred though, I've been thinking of going full indie if things don't look up. I just really love this field.
It really depends on what's being taught imo. If it's something purely text-based like programming then sure, I absolutely would prefer reading an article to watching a video. For most tutorials though I think there's benefit in seeing things done visually step by step. Most tools are visual, so learning stuff like 3D modelling or video editing through text can be difficult, but seeing someone do it in front of me makes everything click since I can see exactly what he did and don't have to read between the steps.
Better late than never. It's going to take a while for people to get used to not needing the dotenv package.
I'm sure there will be a lot of people where it works just fine but I've seen really common complaints regarding it. Issues like steam input not working, confusion over file system permissions, the flatpak version using its own drivers which may be outdated, etc... It can be a hassle, and there's no real benefit to it compared to just using your package manager.
Godot 4.x projects are compatible with each other and are stable but some people don't upgrade right away for stability or plugins specific to that version. You don't see many companies upgrading from Unity 2021 straight into Unity 2022 when it drops, they'd still use Unity 2021 for various reasons. That's why Unity has Unity Hub for managing versions. I think a project like this can be useful.
But the main language is GDScript, everything else is an alternative if you prefer not to use it.