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
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.
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.
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.
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. 💪
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.
yes.
😎
To be honest, that's the only reply needed!
✌
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
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.
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.
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.
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!
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 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.
Absolutely!
✌
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.
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 👍
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.
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.
👌
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.
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.
真的太好了