javascript 圖表

by Sacha Greif

由Sacha Greif

JavaScript 2018年的三個(gè)有爭(zhēng)議的圖表 (Three Controversial Charts From the State of JavaScript 2018)

您認(rèn)為統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)和圖表很無(wú)聊嗎？ 再想一想… (You thought stats and graphs were boring? Think again…)

“Controversial” is literally the most overused word on the Internet, with the possible exception of “l(fā)iterally”. But this time it’s true: some of the charts in our 2018 State of JavaScript survey results generated a lot more debate than others. Let’s see why!

從字面上看，“有爭(zhēng)議的”是互聯(lián)網(wǎng)上使用最多的單詞，可能有“文字上的”例外。 但這一次是真的： 2018年JavaScript狀態(tài)調(diào)查結(jié)果中的某些圖表比其他圖表引起了更多爭(zhēng)議。 讓我們看看為什么！

性別差距是真實(shí)的 (The Gender Gap is Real)

I’m sure you’ve heard that there’s a gender gap in tech. If you had asked me last month, I’d probably have said something like 80/20% male/female. What about you, what would your estimate be?

我相信您已經(jīng)聽(tīng)說(shuō)科技領(lǐng)域存在性別差距。 如果您上個(gè)月問(wèn)過(guò)我，我大概會(huì)說(shuō)80/20％的男性/女性。 那你呢，你的估計(jì)是多少？

Scroll down to see the answer!

向下滾動(dòng)以查看答案！

…

…

Scroll down…

向下滾動(dòng)…

…

…

Keep scrolling…

繼續(xù)向下滑…

…

…

A little bit more…

多一點(diǎn)…

…

…

Imagine my surprise when our data revealed this sea of red dots and a 95/5% breakdown instead!

想象一下，當(dāng)我們的數(shù)據(jù)顯示出紅點(diǎn)之海和95/5％的故障時(shí)，我感到驚訝！

My first instinct was that something must be wrong with our methodology. After all a lot of people hear about the survey through places like Hacker News or Reddit, which themselves could have skewed demographics.

我的第一個(gè)直覺(jué)是我們的方法一定有問(wèn)題。 畢竟，很多人都是通過(guò)Hacker News或Reddit之類(lèi)的網(wǎng)站來(lái)了解這項(xiàng)調(diào)查的，他們本來(lái)可能會(huì)歪曲人口統(tǒng)計(jì)信息。

But the Stack Overflow developer survey confirmed that our numbers weren’t that far off:

但是Stack Overflow開(kāi)發(fā)人員調(diào)查證實(shí)，我們的數(shù)字相差不遠(yuǎn)：

(Note: it was actually not that easy to find other developer surveys to see if ours and Stack Overflow were outliers or not. If you find any please let me know!)

(注意：查找其他開(kāi)發(fā)人員調(diào)查以查看我們的調(diào)查和Stack Overflow是否離群值實(shí)際上并不容易。如果有發(fā)現(xiàn)，請(qǐng)告訴我！)

As you can imagine, this chart generated a lot of disappointed tweets:

您可以想象，此圖表產(chǎn)生了許多令人失望的推文：

So what can be done? Our first instinct was to find ways to reach out to more women and minorities, and that’s certainly a good first step. But while making the survey itself more inclusive is necessary (and we have some ideas around that, starting with translating it to other languages), it’s also important to remember that a survey only reflects reality.

那該怎么辦呢？ 我們的第一個(gè)直覺(jué)是找到接觸更多婦女和少數(shù)族裔的方法，這無(wú)疑是一個(gè)很好的第一步。 但是，盡管使調(diào)查本身更具包容性是必要的(并且我們對(duì)此有一些想法，首先是將其翻譯成其他語(yǔ)言 )，但切記調(diào)查僅反映了現(xiàn)實(shí)也很重要。

We don’t want to end up focusing on making the numbers look good, and then calling it a day. So the ultimate goal should still be to make the industry as a whole as welcoming as it can be, so that future surveys naturally reflect that new state of things.

我們不想最后集中精力使數(shù)字看起來(lái)不錯(cuò)，然后再稱(chēng)之為一天。 因此，最終目標(biāo)仍然應(yīng)該是使整個(gè)行業(yè)盡可能地受歡迎，以便將來(lái)的調(diào)查自然反映出這種新情況。

角vs角 (Angular vs Angular)

Ever since Angular’s big split into Angular (new hotness) and AngularJS (old version), talking about the framework has been tricky.

自從Angular分為Angular (新功能)和AngularJS (舊版本)以來(lái)，談?wù)摽蚣芤恢焙芗帧?

And this year, I have to admit we didn’t do an especially good job of handling the matter.

今年，我不得不承認(rèn)，我們?cè)谔幚泶耸路矫孀龅貌⒉怀錾?

First, here’s how the Angular question has been addressed over all 3 years of the survey:

首先，這是在過(guò)去三年的調(diào)查中如何解決“角度”問(wèn)題的方法：

• 2016: asked about both Angular and AngularJS, in two separate questions
  2016年：在兩個(gè)單獨(dú)的問(wèn)題中問(wèn)及Angular和AngularJS
• 2017: asked about both Angular and AngularJS, in two separate questions
  2017年：在兩個(gè)單獨(dú)的問(wèn)題中問(wèn)及Angular和AngularJS
• 2018: only asked about Angular
  2018年：只問(wèn)過(guò)Angular

Here’s the resulting chart:

這是結(jié)果圖：

That chart shows Angular for all three years. The 2016 and 2017 data for AngularJS simply doesn’t factor into the chart.

該圖顯示了過(guò)去三年的Angular 。 AngularJS的2016年和2017年數(shù)據(jù)根本沒(méi)有計(jì)入圖表中。

We thought this was the logical thing to do: AngularJS is an old and deprecated technology, so we simply dropped it from the survey and moved on.

我們認(rèn)為這是合乎邏輯的事情：AngularJS是一項(xiàng)過(guò)時(shí)且過(guò)時(shí)的技術(shù)，因此我們只是將其從調(diào)查中刪除并繼續(xù)使用。

The issue of course, as you can maybe guess from the chart, is that many respondents didn’t see things that way. Some of them thought our question about Angular was also about AngularJS, which explains the sudden rise in “would not use again” answers in 2018.

當(dāng)然，您可能從圖表中可以猜到，問(wèn)題是許多受訪者并不這么認(rèn)為。 他們中的一些人認(rèn)為我們關(guān)于Angular的問(wèn)題也是關(guān)于AngularJS的問(wèn)題，這解釋了2018年“將不再使用”答案的突然增加。

This did not go over well:

這進(jìn)展不順利：

In our defense, we simply treated Angular like any other framework mentioned in the survey, using its official name (“Angular”). Maybe we should have taken the initiative to substitute something like “Angular 2+” instead, even though that’s not the official nomenclature; or at least added a special clarifying note to explain the situation.

在我們的辯護(hù)中，我們只是將Angular像調(diào)查中提到的任何其他框架一樣使用了官方名稱(chēng)(“ Angular”)。 也許我們應(yīng)該主動(dòng)代替“ Angular 2+”之類(lèi)的東西，即使這不是官方名稱(chēng)。 或至少添加了一個(gè)特殊的說(shuō)明以解釋這種情況。

In any case, I’ll agree that we did do a poor job of explaining the whole issue, and for that we apologize.

無(wú)論如何，我都同意我們?cè)诮忉屨麄€(gè)問(wèn)題上做得很差，對(duì)此我們深表歉意。

采樣偏差 (Sampling Bias)

We also heard accusations of sampling bias, usually coming from either people in statistics, or people who’ve read into it a bit on Wikipedia.

我們還聽(tīng)到了關(guān)于抽樣偏差的指控，通常來(lái)自統(tǒng)計(jì)人員或在Wikipedia上有所了解的人員。

Here’s something interesting to note: all three members of the State of JS team are React users, not Angular users. It seems like that’d make us more likely to have access to a React-using audience, right?

需要注意的是：JS State團(tuán)隊(duì)的所有三個(gè)成員都是React用戶(hù)，而不是Angular用戶(hù)。 看來(lái)這會(huì)使我們更有可能接觸使用React的受眾，對(duì)嗎？

While this is certainly a possibility, most respondents found the survey through “neutral” sources like Reddit or Hacker News. Also, apart from the Angular issue already discussed, our data seems to match that of other surveys:

盡管這確實(shí)是有可能的，但大多數(shù)受訪者都是通過(guò)Reddit或Hacker News之類(lèi)的“中立”資源找到該調(diào)查的。 此外，除了已經(jīng)討論的Angular問(wèn)題之外，我們的數(shù)據(jù)似乎與其他調(diào)查的數(shù)據(jù)相符：

Unless… does the NPM team use React too? Oh the conspiracy…!

除非……NPM團(tuán)隊(duì)也使用React嗎？ 陰謀哦！

But seriously, as you might imagine, we’re already doing everything we can to spread the survey to a broader audience. And we can only hope that as the survey audience grows year after year, whatever sampling bias we might introduce will naturally evaporate.

但認(rèn)真的，正如您可能想像的那樣，我們已經(jīng)在盡一切可能將調(diào)查傳播給更多的受眾。 我們只能希望，隨著調(diào)查對(duì)象的年復(fù)一年地增長(zhǎng)，我們可能引入的任何抽樣偏差都會(huì)自然消失。

您是否應(yīng)該真正避免使用Ember.js？ (Should You Really Avoid Ember.js?)

Our final controversy concerns our recommendation to “avoid” certain technologies.

我們的最終爭(zhēng)議是關(guān)于“避免”某些技術(shù)的建議。

Well, it does say “AVOID” in all caps right there on the chart, I can’t deny that.

好吧，它確實(shí)在圖表上的所有大寫(xiě)中都表示“避免”，我不能否認(rèn)。

As a user of Ember, Polymer, or any other technology that has the misfortune of ending up in that “avoid” quadrant, this could understandably make you mad. Just because some fraction of developers may have had a bad experience with a library a few years back doesn’t mean everybody should avoid it!

作為Ember，Polymer或其他不幸陷入“避開(kāi)”象限的技術(shù)的用戶(hù)，這可以使您發(fā)瘋。 僅僅因?yàn)槟承╅_(kāi)發(fā)人員幾年前可能對(duì)圖書(shū)館有不好的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，并不意味著每個(gè)人都應(yīng)該避免使用它！

I can certainly understand that sentiment, since I’m in the same boat as you. I’m a heavy Meteor user myself: I wrote a book about it, I’m even building an entire open-source framework on it, yet I had to accept that Meteor too falls in the “avoid” quadrant:

我當(dāng)然可以理解這種情緒，因?yàn)槲液湍阍谕粭l船上。 我本人是Meteor的沉重用戶(hù)：我寫(xiě)了一本關(guān)于它的書(shū)，甚至在它上面建立了一個(gè)完整的開(kāi)源框架 ，但我不得不接受Meteor也屬于“避免”象限：

I think Meteor is great, but this is not just about what I think, or what you think. It’s about what 20,000 developers think.

我認(rèn)為流星很棒，但這不僅僅關(guān)乎我的想法或您的想法。 這是關(guān)于20,000名開(kāi)發(fā)人員的想法。

And yes, going from “most developers wouldn’t use X again” to “you should avoid X” does take a leap. We could just give you the data and leave you to form your own conclusions.

是的，從“大多數(shù)開(kāi)發(fā)人員不會(huì)再使用X”到“您應(yīng)該避免使用X”確實(shí)是一個(gè)飛躍。 我們可以給您數(shù)據(jù)，讓您自己得出結(jié)論。

But this goes back to the whole reason we’re running the survey in the first place: helping you make decisions. If you already know and love Ember, Meteor, or any other technology, then more power to you! We have no intention of criticizing your choice.

但這可以歸結(jié)為我們首先進(jìn)行調(diào)查的全部原因：幫助您制定決策。 如果您已經(jīng)了解并喜歡Ember，Meteor或任何其他技術(shù)，那么為您帶來(lái)更多動(dòng)力！ 我們無(wú)意批評(píng)您的選擇。

If, on the other hand, you come to use for insight and guidance, then we think the best way to do that is to be clear, and maybe even a little blunt. Saying things like “every library has its pros and cons, and you should pick the best one for your needs” may not offend anybody, but it also doesn’t really help anybody.

另一方面，如果您開(kāi)始使用以獲得見(jiàn)識(shí)和指導(dǎo)，那么我們認(rèn)為做到這一點(diǎn)的最佳方法就是弄清楚，甚至可能會(huì)變得有些直率。 說(shuō)諸如“每個(gè)圖書(shū)館都有其優(yōu)缺點(diǎn)，您應(yīng)該選擇最適合自己的圖書(shū)館”之類(lèi)的東西可能不會(huì)冒犯任何人，但它實(shí)際上并沒(méi)有對(duì)任何人有所幫助。

JavaScript(某些)的狀態(tài) (The State of (Some Of) JavaScript)

At the end of the day it’s important to remember that a survey can only go so far. We do our best to be representative of the entire JavaScript ecosystem, but 20,000 developers is still only a tiny portion of the community.

歸根結(jié)底，重要的是要記住，一項(xiàng)調(diào)查只能走這么遠(yuǎn)。 我們盡力代表整個(gè)JavaScript生態(tài)系統(tǒng)，但是20,000個(gè)開(kāi)發(fā)人員仍然只是社區(qū)的一小部分。

We don’t think this means it’s not worth trying, though. And with your help, we believe we can keep improving things year after year.

但是，我們認(rèn)為這并不值得嘗試。 在您的幫助下，我們相信我們可以年復(fù)一年地不斷改進(jìn)。

So keep your feedback coming, whether good or bad. And of course, see you in 2019!

因此，無(wú)論您的反饋是好是壞，請(qǐng)隨時(shí)提出反饋。 當(dāng)然，2019年見(jiàn)！

翻譯自: https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/three-controversial-charts-from-the-state-of-js-2018-ec9dda45749/

javascript 圖表

總結(jié)

以上是生活随笔為你收集整理的javascript 图表_JavaScript 2018年的三个有争议的图表的全部?jī)?nèi)容，希望文章能夠幫你解決所遇到的問(wèn)題。

如果覺(jué)得生活随笔網(wǎng)站內(nèi)容還不錯(cuò)，歡迎將生活随笔推薦給好友。