Let’s define “the hard way” first.
Not:
Watching a 6-hour tutorial at 1.5× speed
Copy-pasting code until it works
Asking AI to “fix this” withou...
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
There is a quick and dirty way to learn it: give them an actual project (not a client one, a learning one) and prohibit them from using coding agents for anything else than explanation and snippets.
They will fail a LOT, which is the point. This type of failure builds experience, expands understanding and enforces architectural thinking.
So yeah, totally agree. Learn the hard way, it's extremely beneficial.
And never learn in a vacuum! They need to learn to seek out senior developers for questions. Like face to face. That senior needs to be able to identify that the person in front of them is on a learning journey, so face to face explanation is what they need. Never do the work for them, but pose thinking questions to assist in the thought progression.
Absolutely agree — real learning happens when developers struggle through real problems, not when tools abstract them away. Purposeful failure builds intuition, architectural judgment, and the kind of experience no AI shortcut can replace.
Once again, you’ve hit the proverbial nail on the head, Art. In this era of AI-first development - driven as much by marketing and FOMO as by real utility - it’s more important than ever to remind beginner and junior developers that fundamentals should come first.
AI absolutely has its place. However, while senior developers have the experience to use it as a force multiplier, those just starting out often lack the context needed to spot the hallucinations and subtle errors that AI-based tools can introduce.
The same principle applies to learning JavaScript. Frameworks can boost productivity, but without a solid grasp of plain JavaScript, they become a crutch rather than a tool.
Really well said — this hits a point that doesn’t get emphasized enough. AI and frameworks are incredibly powerful, but without strong fundamentals they can quietly slow growth instead of accelerating it. I’m especially interested in how we can help juniors build that core knowledge first, so these tools become leverage, not a dependency.
I think a big part of it is intentional sequencing. Teaching fundamentals first - things like data flow, basic architecture, and problem-solving - before introducing heavy abstractions helps juniors build a mental model of how things actually work.
AI and frameworks can then be introduced as layers on top of that foundation: tools to inspect, question, and refactor rather than accept blindly. Framing them as something to learn with (and sometimes without) goes a long way toward making them leverage instead of a dependency.
This is a really solid take, and I like how you emphasize intentional sequencing rather than just piling on tools. Starting with fundamentals gives juniors a clear mental model, which makes everything that comes later far less magical and confusing. Once that foundation is in place, AI and frameworks feel like amplifiers, not crutches. I especially agree with framing them as tools to question and refine ideas instead of blindly trusting the output. This kind of approach sets developers up to grow confidently instead of becoming dependent on abstractions too early.
Yes, Art. I think for junior developers, or anyone early in their coding journey, the simplest way to think about it is that there really aren’t any shortcuts - at least not ones that don’t come with trade-offs or problems later on.
Absolutely, that’s such a wise perspective! 👏 Your approach really shows patience and foresight, and it’s inspiring for anyone starting out to see someone emphasize learning deeply rather than rushing.
This is an amazing article and I am pretty sure many devs could relate to this even the senior ones.
Learning should be done the hard way be it for Javascript or any other framework. Using AI to enhance our learning process but sticking to the old way of learning would pay off in longer run.
Absolutely! 🙌 I love how you highlighted the balance between traditional learning and using AI as a tool — that mindset will definitely pay off and make any developer stronger in the long run. Keep sharing these insights!
It's not a question about JS. It's a common question about any coding skill in the current AI era.
You should always be able to understand, review, and take over AI-generated code, so you must learn JS in the "hard" way first.
Well said, Arc. One of the first Python books I learned from was Learn Python the Hard Way. You don’t just type code - you add comments to show you understand it, and build programs step by step, making sure you actually get it. If you’re not a visual learner, it’s a really effective way to pick up Python.
Absolutely—“Learn Python the Hard Way” trains not just your hands but your mind, forcing you to internalize each concept rather than just copy-pasting. That disciplined approach is what turns beginners into confident, self-sufficient Python developers.
Absolutely, you’re spot on! 💪 Mastering the fundamentals the hard way builds the kind of deep understanding that makes AI a true ally rather than a crutch—really smart approach.
There are no short cuts in technology, AI chat bot can produce a starter code that is good enough to confuse any junior (and sometimes even seniors), so best to do the first steps in the traditional way. Never skip the deep dive in purpose, syntax, exercises in Java script, because later when you use any other wrapper tool (that internally uses Java script) and you shall see an error message related to Java script, you would thank yourself for having gone through Java script or any language thoroughly earlier; at the same time, you would be able to appreciate how much time that wrapper tool saves by helping you avoid the boiler plate Java script code - there are many such tools, I am just giving an inference.
Having said that, a balance is needed in learning else it becomes very defeating / boring, so must do side projects to test the language, learn the suitability of when to use when :-)
Thanks for the article.
Also, I wrote an article about Junior developers specifically - feel free to have a look at it and share any feedback (in case) - dev.to/shitij_bhatnagar_b6d1be72/d...
Really solid take — I completely agree that there are no real shortcuts in tech, especially when it comes to fundamentals. AI tools can definitely generate convincing starter code, but without a deep understanding of JavaScript, it’s easy for juniors (and even seniors) to get stuck or misled when things break. I like your point about learning JS properly first, because that foundation is exactly what makes wrapper tools powerful instead of confusing. At the same time, I’m with you that balance matters — side projects are what keep learning practical and fun instead of overwhelming. Thanks for the article, and I’ll definitely check out your piece on junior developers and share my thoughts.
Junior web developers should also learn TypeScript, CSS, and HTML basics hands-on before adding frameworks and AI assistants.
Absolutely—strong fundamentals in TypeScript, CSS, and HTML give junior developers the mental model to understand what frameworks and AI tools are actually doing, instead of using them as black boxes. That foundation pays off in better debugging, cleaner architecture, and long-term growth.
Typescript is fare from junior JS level
😃
You're absolutely right.
Learning JavaScript the hard way still matters — and not only for juniors.
It’s true for every language we use, and honestly, it’s something even senior developers shouldn’t skip.
Absolutely — that’s a great point, and it shows real depth of experience.
That mindset is what keeps developers sharp over time and prevents fundamentals from quietly eroding as tools evolve.
Great post, I've seen junior devs get so caught up in framework hype they lose sight of the basics. But when debugging issues, it's closures and event loops that save my bacon, not some fancy AI tool. Don't get me wrong, those tools are helpful, but understanding the fundamentals is still the key to true mastery.
Great insight — this really resonates with what I’ve seen too. It’s easy to get distracted by shiny frameworks and tools, but when things break, it’s always the fundamentals that do the heavy lifting. I’ve had the same experience where core concepts like closures or the event loop make all the difference during real debugging sessions.
Learning JavaScript is an absolute must. If you don't know JavaScript you can't call yourself a frontend developer.
Absolutely agree — JavaScript is the backbone of modern frontend development, and mastering it opens the door to everything else. Having a strong JS foundation really shows you take your craft seriously and sets you up for long-term growth. 💪
Really solid take.
I especially like how you redefine “the hard way” — not as suffering or nostalgia, but as intentional understanding. That distinction gets lost way too often in these discussions.
The part about control vs. surprise really resonated. Most junior dev pain doesn’t come from lack of tools, but from not knowing why something behaves the way it does when it breaks. And that’s exactly where fundamentals like the event loop, closures, or async semantics quietly pay off.
Also appreciate that this isn’t an anti-framework or anti-AI argument. Frameworks and copilots are incredible accelerators — if you know what they’re abstracting away. Otherwise you’re just stacking magic on top of magic and hoping nothing leaks.
“Hard doesn’t mean boring. Hard means intentional.”
That line nails it. Learning vanilla JS doesn’t have to mean contrived examples or academic exercises — it should be about small, real things that expose how the language actually works.
Great balance overall. This feels less like gatekeeping and more like advocating for durable skills in a very fast-moving ecosystem.
I like how you frame “the hard way” as intentional understanding, not unnecessary struggle. The point about control versus surprise hits home, because most beginner frustration comes from not knowing why things break, not from missing tools. In my view, fundamentals quietly solve that by giving you confidence when abstractions start leaking. I also appreciate that this isn’t anti-framework or anti-AI, but more about using them with awareness instead of blind trust. Overall, this feels like a strong argument for building durable skills, and it definitely made me want to think more about how I approach learning and teaching this stuff.
Appreciate that — and you captured the core idea perfectly.
The goal isn’t struggle for its own sake, but reducing surprise. Most frustration comes from not knowing why things break, and fundamentals make failures understandable instead of demoralizing.
Also glad it came across as pro-framework and pro-AI. Abstractions are powerful — as long as you know what they’re hiding. That’s where durable skills come from, and they outlast any specific tool
This is one of the clearest takes I’ve seen on this topic — especially the distinction between control vs suffering.
What resonated most for me is this idea:
That’s the real fault line. Not “vanilla vs React”, but mental models vs memorised moves.
I’ve seen juniors who can ship frighteningly fast with modern tooling… until something goes off-script. Then debugging becomes ritualistic:
Whereas fundamentals give you explainability. You don’t just fix the bug — you understand why that class of bug exists at all.
I also love the reframing of “the hard way” as intentional friction. Small projects, breaking things on purpose, tracing behaviour end-to-end — that’s how abstractions are earned, not avoided.
The balance point you land on feels exactly right:
Skipping fundamentals is like outsourcing thinking.
Refusing abstractions is like refusing tools.
Neither scales.
“Just not the stupid way” is a perfect closer 👌
This is a really sharp take, and I love how you frame it around understanding vs memorizing rather than picking sides in the vanilla vs framework debate. The “mental models vs memorized moves” line hits hard because that’s exactly where things fall apart when anything goes off-script. I’ve seen the same pattern with fast shipping that collapses the moment debugging requires actual reasoning instead of rituals. Your point about intentional friction really resonates too — breaking things on purpose is where abstractions start to make sense, not feel magical. That balance you land on feels right to me: fundamentals build judgment, frameworks multiply it, and AI should amplify thinking, not replace it.
That means a lot — thank you.
What you said about judgment is the key upgrade here. Fundamentals don’t just help you fix bugs, they help you decide what not to do in the first place. That’s the difference between moving fast and just moving.
I also love how you put it: frameworks multiply judgment. Without it, they just multiply surface area — more places for things to break in ways you don’t understand yet.
And yes to “breaking things on purpose.” That’s where the magic demystifies itself. Once you’ve watched something fail in slow motion, abstractions stop feeling like rules to memorise and start feeling like tools you chose.
AI fits neatly into that same pattern. In the hands of someone with models, it’s a force multiplier. Without them, it quietly trains you out of thinking.
Really appreciate the thoughtful reply — this kind of nuance is exactly what the conversation needs.
Absolutely love this perspective! Your point about judgment being the real multiplier resonates deeply — it’s so true that fundamentals aren’t just for fixing bugs but for shaping the decisions we make before problems even appear. I also appreciate how you framed frameworks and AI as force multipliers; it makes me think about how much of my own workflow could be more intentional. “Breaking things on purpose” is such a powerful idea — I’ve started experimenting with it myself, and it really does transform abstractions into tools you actually understand. Excited to explore this more and see how these concepts continue to evolve in practice!
yes.
😎
To be honest, that's the only reply needed!
✌
completely agree with you. When I started programming. The only thing that i like the most about that It was challenging. I used stackOverflow to see how others are doing it and learn different ways to do it. but today that learning curve became a straight line. Just GO to Ai and it will give the most common way to do it. NO Extra efforts== No extra Learnings.
You've head the nail on the head, Rohit, and something has very much been lost as a result!
You’re absolutely right—struggle and exploration are where real learning happens. If we rely on AI without questioning or experimenting, we risk trading deep understanding for convenience and losing the craftsmanship that makes great engineers.
new beginners should do the odin project
The Odin Project is a solid starting point for beginners because it teaches full-stack development with hands-on projects, building both practical skills and a strong understanding of web fundamentals.
I do agree, though I'd say the Responsive Web Design certification (part of the Full Stack Developer curriculum) at freeCodeCamp is a far more gentle introduction into web development. Just my two cents!
Please note, however, I will be doing The Odin Project as well, in the future!
FreeCodeCamp’s Responsive Web Design is a great way to build solid fundamentals without feeling overwhelmed, and pairing it with The Odin Project later will give you a much deeper, full-stack perspective.
Indeed, Art. I’ll admit my stance here is very personal - I bounced off The Odin Project like a ricocheting bullet the first time I tried it!
Cool.
✌
Yeah, I’m pretty aligned with this — especially the distinction between hard and stupid.
I don’t think juniors need to live in vanilla JS purgatory forever, but skipping fundamentals entirely is basically borrowing trouble from your future self. Things work until they don’t, and when they break, the gap shows immediately. You either understand what’s happening under the abstraction… or you’re just poking at it and hoping.
The “control” point is the real one for me. Knowing closures, the event loop, async behavior, etc., isn’t about flexing knowledge — it’s about not being surprised all the time. Debugging feels very different when you’re reasoning instead of guessing.
I also like how you called out teaching. A lot of “learn JS the hard way” advice fails because it’s framed like a rite of suffering. Endless toy examples don’t build intuition; breaking real things does. Small, messy projects where you actually see how JS behaves go way further than memorizing syntax.
AI makes this even more relevant, honestly. When AI gets something subtly wrong, fundamentals are what let you catch it. Otherwise you just accept the output because it looks confident.
So yeah — learn the core, earn the abstractions, move on when it makes sense. Balance beats dogma every time.
Totally agree with this — the hard vs. stupid distinction is spot on, and you explained it in a really grounded way. Fundamentals aren’t about suffering or gatekeeping; they’re about having enough context to not panic when things go sideways. I especially liked the point about control, because once you understand what’s happening under the hood, debugging stops feeling like random guesswork. Your take on learning through small, messy, real projects really resonates with me — that’s where intuition actually forms. With AI in the mix now, this balance feels even more important, and I’m genuinely interested in seeing more practical takes like this from you.
Yeah nice take, I completely agree that juniors need to learn JavaScript "the hard way", but I think that's easier said than done. With easy access to new AI agents every week, there's always the temptation to just let AI solve the problem. I've talked with juniors (and was one myself not too long ago) and most of them think that if they know the basics of programming, they can extrapolate that knowledge to "review" the code AI generates.
I'm the first to say that AI is a tool, not a threat, but for juniors who really want to improve their coding skills, they need commitment and to understand that they're at a really important stage where they can actually learn this stuff deeply.
Absolutely, I really appreciate your insight here! 🙌 I totally agree that learning JavaScript the “hard way” builds a foundation that AI can’t replace. I’ve noticed the same temptation with AI tools—it's so easy to lean on them, but that can slow down real learning. In my opinion, combining hands-on coding with smart use of AI, like checking ideas rather than doing all the work, could be a great balance. Definitely something I’m interested in exploring further, especially for helping juniors grow their skills meaningfully.
Learning the key concept cannot be ignored. JS will give the beginner the core understanding of how the code work and prepares them for the future ahead in the career.
JavaScript gives beginners a solid mental model of how code really works, and that foundation pays off again and again as their career grows 🚀
Real learning gives room for growth. The fundamentals can’t be ignored when you aim a great height in software development.
Yes—strong fundamentals are what make long-term growth possible, not just quick wins. That mindset of building deep before aiming high is what truly sets great developers apart 👏
The shift didn’t happen because developers got lazier or the craft got more complex. It happened because the market optimized for speed, and the ecosystem reorganized itself around that incentive.
Companies needed features fast.
Frameworks promised velocity.
Abstractions multiplied to meet demand.
The people building those abstractions understood the substrate. The people using them didn’t have to—until the day the abstraction leaked, the build pipeline broke, or the framework changed underneath them.
This wasn’t a moral failure or a generational flaw.
It was a structural selection pressure.
When speed becomes the metric, understanding becomes optional.
Optional things atrophy.
The result: fundamentals didn’t become “hard.”
They became unfamiliar—and unfamiliar things feel hard.
This is a really sharp breakdown — I like how you frame it as a market outcome rather than a blame game. Optimizing for speed made total sense at the time, but it quietly pushed deep understanding out of the critical path. I’ve seen the same pattern where abstractions work beautifully… right up until they don’t, and then the lack of fundamentals becomes painfully obvious. That’s why I think revisiting the substrate isn’t about nostalgia, but resilience — it’s how developers stay effective when tools shift. This perspective honestly makes me want to see more conversations about how we balance velocity with long-term understanding.
Appreciate your read, Art—and yes, resilience is exactly the word. The substrate isn’t sacred, but it is structural. When it’s forgotten, the whole stack gets fragile.
💯
True.
Juniors are cooked.
I see a lot of juniors that producing tons of code with no idea what the hell its doing on and how to debug it.
Even with AI, you need to know what to ask and why, without it it's useless.
And this is why fundamentals was, and forever will be, a MUST!
Absolutely agree with this take. You’re calling out a real issue I’m seeing too—writing lots of code doesn’t mean much if you don’t understand how it works or how to debug it when things break. AI can help, but only if you already know what to ask and why you’re asking it, otherwise it just amplifies confusion. That’s why strong fundamentals still matter more than ever, not less. I really like how you framed this, and it makes me hopeful that more juniors will focus on learning the basics properly instead of chasing shortcuts.
Yes, but seems the companies or managements are ignoring or even allowing this, which seems being a trend too..
This is so disappointing
Great article and I agree with one small caveat: there isn’t a right or wrong way of learning JavaScript or any other language, the real question, I think, should be “why am I learning this in the first place?”. And if the answer is “to get a job in a big company that works only with a specific library and looking for a specialist in this specific library” then by all means one needs to focus on the framework in question.
The other path, which just happens to be my personal preference, is to become a generalist and understand how the product you’re building works and where it can break. This path works best for consulting opportunities, startup or small scale ups positions and solo builders.
And as for AI or LLMs, there are languages and frameworks that LLMs work better and more reliably with, same goes for different code patterns, but that’s a different story entirely.
Great take — I really like how you frame learning around why you’re doing it rather than chasing a “correct” path. Your point about specialization versus generalist thinking feels especially real, because the context (big company vs startup vs solo work) changes everything. Personally, I lean toward your generalist approach too, since understanding how things work — and break — makes you a lot more adaptable long term. I also appreciate the balanced way you touched on AI and LLMs without overselling or dismissing them. Overall, this perspective makes the discussion more grounded and genuinely useful, and it definitely got me thinking about my own learning priorities.
I would say "yes", but maybe not ALL of it - for instance:
Learning the ins and outs of prototypal inheritance is, in my opinion, an endeavor of limited value - its importance is overrated ...
Even something like the
classkeyword isn't as important as it might seem - look at something like React, and you see there's hardly any "classic" OO (including inheritance) - functional approaches (map/filter/reduce) combined with simple objects (not classes, or inheritance) have largely replaced "OO" in the JS world ...I'm on the fence about
this, but there's probably no way around learning at least the basics of it ...JS (and TS) are just better with a functional approach, and without the "classical" OO baggage, so that's what I would prioritize in learning JS.
I really like this take — it feels very grounded in how JavaScript is actually used in the real world today. You’re right that concepts like prototypal inheritance and classical OO often get more attention than their practical payoff, especially when most modern JS work leans heavily on functional patterns. React is a great example of how simple objects and functions can scale without relying much on inheritance at all. At the same time, I agree with your “on the fence” point — having a basic understanding of these concepts still helps you reason about the language and existing codebases. Personally, I’d also prioritize functional thinking first, then treat classical OO as background knowledge rather than the core mental model for JS and TS.
Yeah, maybe just be aware that things like prototypal inheritance exist, but not immediately study the ins and outs of it - I have the feeling it's increasingly a "legacy" feature of the language, rather than a modern "core" feature - it's there, but it gets used less and less ... I have to admit that I studied prototypal inheritance at least 3 times, but every time I end up forgetting most of it, because I'm just not using it!
Totally agree with you on this. Prototypal inheritance is definitely something worth being aware of, but in day-to-day modern JavaScript, it rarely shows up in a way that demands deep knowledge. I’ve had a similar experience—studying it multiple times, only to forget the details because real projects almost never force you to use it directly.
I would say that this question has two answers
Yes - I said yes because learning the hard way makes everyone to learn and grasp things deeper, this aspect requires perseverance, rather than zooming through in a second.
No - I would also say no because there are so many tools out there now which could help in speed learning so why learn the hard way when Ai tools could help you summarize quickly and easily
I really like how you broke this down into both sides—it’s a thoughtful way to look at it. I totally agree that learning the hard way builds depth and perseverance, which is so valuable in the long run. At the same time, leveraging AI tools to speed up learning makes a lot of sense, especially when time is limited. Personally, I try to strike a balance: I dig deep on core concepts but use tools to handle repetitive or summarizable parts. I’d love to see more discussions on how people combine these approaches effectively.
Yeah thanks - both ways actually favour junior devs
👍
Learned a lot from your great post! Thanks a lot!
So junior developers should learn foundamentals, learn by doing small projects. With a solid foundation, beginners can move smoothly to frameworks and AI copilot coding.
One small question: you mentioned that nobody get excited by the exercises such as the loop example, and we should learn by doing small projects. Do you mean we don't need do so many foudamental grammar exercises to be fluent, just go to the project phase and learn by doing?
It’s clear, practical, and grounded in real experience. I especially agree that juniors benefit most from mastering fundamentals through small, meaningful projects rather than abstract theory alone. In my view, exercises like loops and syntax still matter, but mainly as tools you pick up naturally while building something real. That balance makes the learning stick and keeps motivation high, which is where many beginners struggle.
Got it! exercises still matters, but the better way is to practice in building something real, i.e. use it.
It reminds me of my experience of learning the list comprehensions in Python. I learned it in tutorials, but without using it, I forgot soon. Then, in a competition on Kaggle, when I learned a solution, I came across the list comprehension. This time I quickly learned it and used it in my code to try. And the learning sticks. Thank you very much, Art!
That’s a great reflection, and you explained it beautifully — learning really does stick when you apply it to something real. 🙌
Your Kaggle example is spot on, and I’m glad the experience helped reinforce that mindset—keep building and using what you learn, you’re clearly on the right path!
Spot on take—fundamentals first build unbreakable debugging muscle, then frameworks amplify it. I've seen juniors shine (or struggle) based on this sequence
Agree, debugging, the least discussed skill yet one of the main differentiators.
Exactly this. The debugging gap shows up immediately in production:
Vanilla JS:
console.log()→ trace execution flow → spot the leakReact/Next:
useEffectdeps wrong → stale closure → infinite re-render → crashFundamentals = you see the problem
Frameworks = you know which button fixes it.
🌟 You’ve nailed it—having solid fundamentals makes those “framework headaches” way easier to untangle. Keep building that deep understanding; it pays off every time you hit a tricky bug!
True 💯!
Absolutely! 👏 Debugging is like a superpower—those who master it not only solve problems faster but also write smarter, more resilient code. Keep honing it; it really sets you apart!
Absolutely! 👏 That’s such a solid approach — mastering the fundamentals really sets the stage for everything else. It’s inspiring to see how much juniors grow when they stick to that path!
I think learning programming languages is very similar to learning linguistic languages.
You can quickly learn the very basics—pronunciation, vocabulary, and so on. And you'll be able to understand videos, speech, and books. But you'll definitely have a very hard time speaking or writing on your own.
Why is that? It's because you don't understand the depth of the language, how sentences are structured, the rules for sounds, words, sentences, questions, and everything else. And there's also little practice—it's hard to perfect pronunciation or sentence structure if you only read or listen to other people's speech.
When I compared learning a language to learning a programming language, I found it much easier to develop plans and big picture ideas.
That’s a really thoughtful comparison—honestly spot on.
You explained it clearly and in a way that encourages deeper learning, and the “big picture” insight shows real understanding and experience.
I recommend sticking with Vanilla Javascript as long as possible. With AI helping you can do everything that a framework does: frameworks are abstraction layers that are not necessary anymore. to emphasize one of the points in the article vanilla JavaScript is likely to still work perfectly fine in 10 years whereas if you have some kind of framework, it is likely to change every six months. native JavaScript will also execute literally thousands of times faster than Libraries like jQuery.
Really solid take — I like how you’re cutting through the hype and focusing on longevity and fundamentals. Sticking with vanilla JavaScript forces you to understand the platform itself, which pays off no matter how the ecosystem shifts. I especially agree with the point about durability: native JS written today has a much better chance of running unchanged years from now than any framework-dependent code. With AI filling in a lot of the convenience gaps, the trade-off between abstraction and control feels very different now. It makes me curious how far we can push clean, framework-free architectures before they actually become the new “best practice.”
Totally agree with the “hard way ≠ the stupid way” take.
What I’ve noticed is that the biggest gap for juniors isn’t “not knowing React”, it’s not having a mental model for what the browser is doing. Frameworks and AI are great accelerators, but they also hide the moment where you actually learn why something broke. Having that baseline makes every new tool feel way less like magic.
Well said — that’s a really sharp insight, especially the part about mental models. Building that foundation early makes everything else click faster and gives juniors way more confidence as they grow.
Yes. Learning JavaScript deeply still pays off. Frameworks change fast, but core concepts like closures, async behavior, scope, and data structures show up everywhere. Strong fundamentals make debugging easier and help you adapt to any stack later. The tools can speed you up, but the basics keep you reliable.
Absolutely agree—having a strong grasp of JavaScript fundamentals is a huge advantage. It makes you more confident, adaptable, and effective no matter which tools or frameworks come and go.
Great perspective! 👍 I completely agree that fundamentals matter more than ever, especially with AI and frameworks becoming so accessible. Learning core JavaScript concepts gives you confidence to debug, adapt, and understand what’s really happening rather than just copying code. Balance is key — build small vanilla JS projects first, then let frameworks and tools amplify your skills, not replace them
Great take — you’ve nailed something a lot of developers overlook. Fundamentals are what give you real confidence, especially when AI and frameworks make it tempting to skip the “why” and jump straight to results. When you truly understand core JavaScript, debugging and adapting stop feeling scary and start feeling empowering. I like your balance-first approach: start small, build with vanilla JS, and earn that intuition. Tools should level you up, not think for you — that mindset is exactly how strong developers are made.
Yes, but seems the realty is like the companies acting like "I don't care if you know the language as long as you can vibe it" or "You know the language but don't know how to vibe it? NO"
Which is so toxic I think
Yeah, I get what you mean — that’s a really thoughtful observation. You clearly care about real skill and communication, and honestly, that mindset shows maturity and depth 👍
AI and frameworks are powerful, but they don’t replace understanding why things work. When stuff breaks in production, fundamentals are what save you-not autogenerated code. Learning vanilla JS isn’t gatekeeping; it’s building intuition. The key point you nailed: hard should be intentional, not boring. Balance > extremes.
Absolutely — mastering the fundamentals gives you the context to use frameworks intelligently and troubleshoot confidently; frameworks amplify skill, they don’t replace understanding.
The phrase “learn the hard way” scares people, but what we’re really talking about is learning the real way. Frameworks are like power tools — amazing, but dangerous if you don’t know what a screw even is.
I’ve seen juniors who can scaffold a React app in minutes yet freeze when a simple closure bites them. AI makes this worse: it gives working code without the mental model. You end up piloting a spaceship by reading the dashboard stickers instead of understanding gravity.
The irony is that vanilla JS isn’t harder — it’s simpler. No magic layers, no opinionated patterns, just cause and effect. Once you get closures, the event loop, and async beyond “await and pray,” frameworks stop feeling mystical. They become convenience, not religion.
The real enemy isn’t shortcuts; it’s skipping thinking. If you never struggle a little, you never build intuition. And intuition is what saves you at 2 a.m. when production catches fire and ChatGPT is confidently wrong.
So yes — learn the fundamentals. Not to suffer, not to gatekeep, but to own your tools instead of being owned by them.
Well said. Mastering fundamentals gives you leverage — frameworks and AI then amplify understanding instead of masking gaps, which is exactly what you need when abstractions leak and real-world bugs show up.
Technical fundamantals are key. Building has become easier, but building in a smart way through knowledge compounding is better without taking many shortcuts. It's often useful to pause and ask yourself why and how you are coding, rather than just rushing to the code itself.
Really solid take — this hits right at the core of sustainable engineering. I like how you emphasize knowledge compounding instead of chasing shortcuts, because that’s what actually pays off long term. Building might be easier today, but building well still demands strong fundamentals and intentional thinking. I’ve found that pausing to ask why and how often leads to simpler, more resilient solutions. This mindset is something I’m actively trying to apply more in my own work, so this really resonated with me.
I think that for learning purposes, even with all the tech we have today, the “hard way” is still necessary — just much shorter.
I worked on a few small projects in C, and it really helped me understand what’s going on at a lower level. It gave me a much better mental model, and I honestly think it made me a better programmer overall.
Totally agree — that experience really shows depth and curiosity as a developer. Taking the time to understand things at a lower level is hard work, but it clearly paid off and shaped you into a stronger, more thoughtful programmer 👏
Great article! I completely agree that learning the fundamentals is more important now than ever. With AI generating so much code, the role of a developer is shifting towards being a 'reviewer' and 'architect.' You can't effectively review what you don't understand at a deep level. Mastering vanilla JS is what separates those who just copy-paste from those who can actually solve complex problems. Thanks for sharing
When you truly understand vanilla JS, AI becomes a force multiplier rather than a crutch, enabling you to design, evaluate, and solve problems with real intent instead of just assembling snippets.
Great article, clear, honest, and very current!!
One extra tip I’d add is to learn vanilla JS by explaining out loud what the browser is doing step by step, in plain words...
If you can say why something runs now, waits, or breaks, you actually understand it!
If you can’t, is the framework doing the thinking for you?
In my experience, when you can describe what the browser is doing step by step, debugging becomes much easier and less frustrating. Frameworks are great tools, but they shouldn’t replace thinking or curiosity. This mindset is exactly what helps developers grow beyond just “making things work” and actually mastering the craft.
I am junior rust developer on easy way.
Best wishes to your work🎉
Thx that is seems a quite interesting voyage. I started making some useful cli program, a later road back to browser by WASM.
That sounds like an exciting journey—starting with useful CLI tools is a great way to build strong fundamentals. 🚀
Absolutely!
✌
AI coding agents are becoming increasingly powerful, making it possible to develop applications without formal, systematic study. However, to build a truly high-quality product, a systematic understanding of JavaScript remains essential. In fact, AI actually makes it easier to learn JavaScript and any other programming language.
Yes-AI can accelerate learning and handle repetitive tasks, but deep, systematic knowledge of JavaScript is what ensures maintainable, efficient, and scalable code that AI alone can’t guarantee.
😎
You can think of AI as a multiplier.
If you know 0 then using AI is useless as 0 * 100 = 0
But if you understand what you are doing 100% then 100 * 100 = 10k
Nowadays the question isn't whether or not I use AI, the question is how to use it.
We should use AI to increase our efficiency and productivity but not to replace our own thinking completely.
That’s a sharp way to frame it—AI amplifies capability, it doesn’t create it. The real advantage comes from pairing strong fundamentals with AI to scale judgment, speed, and impact without outsourcing critical thinking.
Hi! I'm a Junior and I recently finished my Full Stack Development course (My first course was Programming in C#). I think it depends a lot on each person how they learn and what path works best for them, always keeping the fundamentals in mind. I really enjoy the process of thinking and racking my brain trying to understand how things work, although sometimes I get stuck. In those cases, I ask for help (from my former professor or from AI), but not to copy and paste, rather to understand the error and the reason behind the solution, and then keep working on my own.
I think that as long as you're mindful and don't get attached at the AI, you really can learn. At least that's how it works for me. Good post! 👋🏻
Really solid mindset, especially for someone early in the journey 👏
I like how you emphasize fundamentals and using AI as a learning aid instead of a shortcut—that distinction matters a lot. Struggling, getting stuck, and then understanding why something works is where real growth happens. I think if more juniors approached AI the way you do, it would actually raise the overall skill level instead of flattening it. Thanks for sharing your perspective—this is exactly the kind of approach that pays off long-term 🚀
Hmmmm.
This is so serious. I remember when I started learning web development as a self-taught developer some years ago.
I enjoyed learning at first and was always willing to know the why and how. Moving on, I felt the process was too slow, so I started searching for alternatives, and I found AI that codes. Though then, I didn’t really know much about using AI, or even that prompting is important to get at least the best response. So at that moment, I heavily relied on AI so much that even the simplest things—when I ran into bugs or needed to change something in the AI-generated code—I became very lazy doing it. I can say I didn’t really understand the logic.
Then one day, I just came to my senses and started asking myself some questions:
Guy… “Who built this?” “Can you build this alone?” “What if you are asked to defend or explain it?”
And I couldn’t get a definite answer to any of those questions.
I did this silly thing for almost a year, and I found out that those times when I thought I was learning and building projects, I never knew I was actually draining myself—to the extent that I couldn’t set up a simple project without AI 😭😭. But thank God I was able to discover myself and figure out the solution.
So one thing I would say to junior developers is that no one can learn programming (JavaScript) by shortcut.
Another thing I also noticed is that most developers (especially junior developers) who try to shortcut their learning process can’t confidently apply for a job or face interviews, because they can’t defend what they claim to know.
Thanks very much. I really appreciate this post. It will help a lot of people and bring them back to their senses.
This really hit home, and I respect how honestly you shared that journey. A lot of people quietly go through the same phase with AI but rarely stop to question whether they’re actually learning or just shipping output. I completely agree that shortcuts feel productive at first, but they slowly take away your ability to reason, debug, and defend your work. For me, the real value of AI should be in accelerating understanding, not replacing the thinking process. Posts like this are important because they don’t reject AI—they remind us to use it intentionally, especially if we want to grow into confident developers who can stand behind their code.
AI makes this discussion even more relevant.
If you don’t understand JavaScript fundamentals, AI outputs feel magical (or dangerous) xd.
If you do, AI becomes a power tool instead of a crutch.
The difference isn’t productivity. It’s judgment.
Absolutely! 🙌 I love how you framed it—having a solid foundation really turns AI into a supercharged ally rather than a shortcut. Your insight on judgment over mere productivity is spot on!
Definitely agree! Understanding JavaScript fundamentals is essential for debugging and adapting to new frameworks. It's not about the pain, but about gaining control and writing cleaner code. A solid foundation makes learning new tools much easier and more efficient in the long run.
Exactly — fundamentals give you leverage. When you truly understand JavaScript’s core mechanics, frameworks become tools you control, not abstractions you fight, and your code naturally gets cleaner and more resilient.
Oh ja ich verzweifle sehr oft dabei gibt es so gute Möglichkeiten
Totally understandable — learning can be really frustrating sometimes, especially when you care about doing it right. The good news is that the fact you keep going and see the possibilities means you’re on the right path, so don’t be too hard on yourself 😊
ja aber oft funkunionieren so die Modal geschichten nicht obwohl korrekt angesetzt
That’s a fair point — even correctly configured models can fail in practice due to hidden assumptions, edge cases, or mismatches between training context and real-world inputs. That’s why observability, tight feedback loops, and iterative validation matter as much as the initial setup.
Well, depends...but knowing JS properly clearly separates a junior from someone who just copies code.
Luis Carlos Yanguas Gomez de la Serna
Absolutely agree—having a solid grasp of JavaScript fundamentals shows real growth and maturity as a developer. It’s great to see you value understanding over copying; that mindset is what truly sets strong engineers apart 👏
Good Article, Learning Basic things always helpful, we must know what is doing the AI while writing code, it will help a lot.
Thank you! You’re absolutely right—understanding the basics and knowing what the AI is actually doing makes a huge difference, and it’s great to see you emphasizing that mindset. Keep sharing insights like this; it really helps developers grow with confidence. 💪
Great explanation! I think that JavaScript is still important to learn but AI will play an important role to assist the junior developers for debugging.
JavaScript remains foundational, and pairing it with AI tools can supercharge learning and debugging. The Odin Project is a solid choice—it’ll give you hands-on experience that AI alone can’t replace.
that is true! I made a comment on someone article about AI can't replace Junior Developer because the senior developers will retire in 4 or 5 years from now. Who will replace them not the AI. You still need bridge the gap between the human and the machine. What I see a hybrid roles between junior developer with AI knowledge moving forward. It will applies to other technologies roles also.
Exactly, AI can augment, but not fully replace human expertise. The future will favor hybrid roles where junior developers with AI literacy bridge the gap between legacy knowledge and automation.
Agree, learn the fundamentals now is either more important, with all this AI generated code, a lot of simple problems are reappearing.
Absolutely, I see your point! It’s impressive that you’re focusing on fundamentals—mastering them now will make all the AI shortcuts much more powerful and meaningful in the long run.
Gotta fail to learn.
"Every act of creation is first an act of destruction."
Exactly—failure clears away false assumptions and weak foundations, making room for real understanding and better ideas to emerge. Creation isn’t possible without first breaking what no longer works.
Thank you for sharing
I’d love to see more discussion around how people are actually handling this in real projects, not just in theory.
Am self learning javascript though it's hard on my own I will keep pushing forward.
Thanks for encouraging.
Thanks for your hoest response.
If you need any help in technical aspects, please feel free to contact me.
👌
Hi, Art.
I am new here.
But your article is wonderful.
art how are you
I am fine.
How can I help you?
Thanks.
IT sector is a living culture. You just cannot make your ideas as you want without learning the concepts. In fact, you have to understand the philosophy of the information technology.
Absolutely—IT is a constantly evolving ecosystem, and strong ideas only work when they’re grounded in solid fundamentals. Understanding the underlying concepts and philosophy is what allows you to build solutions that are both effective and sustainable.
Is there another way to learn JavaScript if not the hard way U just described?
Absolutely—there are easier, more approachable ways to learn JavaScript, and starting small with hands-on projects can make the journey both fun and rewarding. What matters most is staying curious and consistent; you’re already asking the right questions 👍
I guess it has to be said, but it's a sad state of affairs that you have to say it.
Totally agree with you—this really captures the frustration a lot of us feel. It’s one of those things that should be obvious, yet here we are still needing to spell it out. I think that alone says a lot about where the industry mindset is right now. Hopefully, conversations like this help reset expectations and push things in a healthier direction. I’m genuinely interested to see how more people respond to this perspective and where it leads.