javascript 图表

by Sacha Greif

由Sacha Greif

JavaScript 2018年的三个有争议的图表 (Three Controversial Charts From the State of JavaScript 2018)

您认为统计数据和图表很无聊吗？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 “literally”. 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!

从字面上看，“有争议的”是互联网上使用最多的单词，可能有“文字上的”例外。但这一次是真的： 2018年JavaScript状态调查结果中的某些图表比其他图表引起了更多争议。让我们看看为什么！

性别差距是真实的 (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?

我相信您已经听说科技领域存在性别差距。如果您上个月问过我，我大概会说80/20％的男性/女性。那你呢，你的估计是多少？

Scroll down to see the answer!

向下滚动以查看答案！

…

Scroll down…

向下滚动…

…

Keep scrolling…

继续向下滑…

…

A little bit more…

多一点…

…

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

想象一下，当我们的数据显示出红点之海和95/5％的故障时，我感到惊讶！

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.

我的第一个直觉是我们的方法一定有问题。毕竟，很多人都是通过Hacker News或Reddit之类的网站来了解这项调查的，他们本来可能会歪曲人口统计信息。

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

但是Stack Overflow开发人员调查证实，我们的数字相差不远：

(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：查找其他开发人员调查以查看我们的调查和Stack Overflow是否离群值实际上并不容易。如果有发现，请告诉我！)

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

您可以想象，此图表产生了许多令人失望的推文：

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.

那该怎么办呢？我们的第一个直觉是找到接触更多妇女和少数族裔的方法，这无疑是一个很好的第一步。但是，尽管使调查本身更具包容性是必要的(并且我们对此有一些想法，首先是将其翻译成其他语言 )，但切记调查仅反映了现实也很重要。

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.

我们不想最后集中精力使数字看起来不错，然后再称之为一天。因此，最终目标仍然应该是使整个行业尽可能地受欢迎，以便将来的调查自然反映出这种新情况。

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.

自从Angular分为Angular (新功能)和AngularJS (旧版本)以来，谈论框架一直很棘手。

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

今年，我不得不承认，我们在处理此事方面做得并不出色。

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

首先，这是在过去三年的调查中如何解决“角度”问题的方法：

2016: asked about both Angular and AngularJS, in two separate questions
2016年：在两个单独的问题中问及Angular和AngularJS
2017: asked about both Angular and AngularJS, in two separate questions
2017年：在两个单独的问题中问及Angular和AngularJS
2018: only asked about Angular
2018年：只问过Angular

Here’s the resulting chart:

这是结果图：

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

该图显示了过去三年的Angular 。 AngularJS的2016年和2017年数据根本没有计入图表中。

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.

我们认为这是合乎逻辑的事情：AngularJS是一项过时且过时的技术，因此我们只是将其从调查中删除并继续使用。

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.

当然，您可能从图表中可以猜到，问题是许多受访者并不这么认为。他们中的一些人认为我们关于Angular的问题也是关于AngularJS的问题，这解释了2018年“将不再使用”答案的突然增加。

This did not go over well:

这进展不顺利：

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.

在我们的辩护中，我们只是将Angular像调查中提到的任何其他框架一样使用了官方名称(“ Angular”)。也许我们应该主动代替“ Angular 2+”之类的东西，即使这不是官方名称。或至少添加了一个特殊的说明以解释这种情况。

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

无论如何，我都同意我们在解释整个问题上做得很差，对此我们深表歉意。

采样偏差 (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.

我们还听到了关于抽样偏差的指控，通常来自统计人员或在Wikipedia上有所了解的人员。

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团队的所有三个成员都是React用户，而不是Angular用户。看来这会使我们更有可能接触使用React的受众，对吗？

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:

尽管这确实是有可能的，但大多数受访者都是通过Reddit或Hacker News之类的“中立”资源找到该调查的。此外，除了已经讨论的Angular问题之外，我们的数据似乎与其他调查的数据相符：

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

除非……NPM团队也使用React吗？阴谋哦！

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.

但认真的，正如您可能想像的那样，我们已经在尽一切可能将调查传播给更多的受众。我们只能希望，随着调查对象的年复一年地增长，我们可能引入的任何抽样偏差都会自然消失。

您是否应该真正避免使用Ember.js？ (Should You Really Avoid Ember.js?)

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

我们的最终争议是关于“避免”某些技术的建议。

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

好吧，它确实在图表上的所有大写中都表示“避免”，我不能否认。

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!

作为Ember，Polymer或其他不幸陷入“避开”象限的技术的用户，这可以使您发疯。仅仅因为某些开发人员几年前可能对图书馆有不好的经验，并不意味着每个人都应该避免使用它！

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:

我当然可以理解这种情绪，因为我和你在同一条船上。我本人是Meteor的沉重用户：我写了一本关于它的书，甚至在它上面建立了一个完整的开源框架，但我不得不接受Meteor也属于“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.

我认为流星很棒，但这不仅仅关乎我的想法或您的想法。这是关于20,000名开发人员的想法。

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，从“大多数开发人员不会再使用X”到“您应该避免使用X”确实是一个飞跃。我们可以给您数据，让您自己得出结论。

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.

但这可以归结为我们首先进行调查的全部原因：帮助您制定决策。如果您已经了解并喜欢Ember，Meteor或任何其他技术，那么为您带来更多动力！我们无意批评您的选择。

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，如果您开始使用以获得见识和指导，那么我们认为做到这一点的最佳方法就是弄清楚，甚至可能会变得有些直率。说诸如“每个图书馆都有其优缺点，您应该选择最适合自己的图书馆”之类的东西可能不会冒犯任何人，但它实际上并没有对任何人有所帮助。

JavaScript(某些)的状态 (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.

归根结底，重要的是要记住，一项调查只能走这么远。我们尽力代表整个JavaScript生态系统，但是20,000个开发人员仍然只是社区的一小部分。

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，我们认为这并不值得尝试。在您的帮助下，我们相信我们可以年复一年地不断改进。

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

因此，无论您的反馈是好是坏，请随时提出反馈。当然，2019年见！