老是抱怨责怪他人

Stop me if you’ve heard this one before.

如果您之前听过我的话，请阻止我。

“Responsive design is bad for performance.”

“响应式设计不利于性能。”

“User agent detection is bad. Don’t segment the web.”

“用户代理检测很差。 不要分割网络。”

“Hybrid apps don’t work as well as native apps.”

“混合应用程序不如本机应用程序运行良好。”

“CSS preprocessors shouldn’t be used because they create bloated CSS.”

“不应该使用CSS预处理程序，因为它们会创建过大CSS。”

If you create for the web you’ve no doubt heard at least a couple of these statements. They’re flung around with alarming frequency.

如果您是为网络创建的，那么无疑您至少会听到其中的一些声明。 他们以惊人的频率跳来跳去。

There is a fundamental problem with this line of thinking: it places the blame on the technique instead of the way the technique was implemented. Generalizing in this way discredits the validity of an approach based on poor execution, and that’s a very harmful way of thinking.

这种思路存在一个根本问题：它将责任归咎于技术，而不是技术的实施方式。 以这种方式进行泛化会基于执行不力而使方法的有效性受到质疑，这是一种非常有害的思维方式。

With any of the examples above, the technology itself wasn’t the problem. CSS preprocessors, PhoneGap, user agent detection, responsive design—these are tools. They are neither inherently bad or good. Their quality depends on the way you wield them.

在上述任何示例中，技术本身都不是问题。 CSS预处理器，PhoneGap，用户代理检测，响应式设计-这些都是工具。 它们既不是天生的坏也不是好。 它们的质量取决于您使用它们的方式。

I’m not a carpenter. If you asked me to build a table you would end up with a lopsided, three-legged abomination. That’s not because of the hammer, or the saw, or the drill—that’s because I suck at using them. Give the same equipment to a carpenter and you get something beautiful.

我不是木匠。 如果您要我建造桌子，您将得到歪斜的三足可憎之处。 这不是因为锤子，锯子或钻头，而是因为我很喜欢使用它们。 给木匠同样的设备，你会得到美丽的东西。

It’s no different with our own tools.

我们自己的工具没什么不同。

When someone builds a 4MB responsive site, blame the implementation. There is no reason why a responsive design can’t perform well. If you take the time to carefully build from a base experience up, only loading assets as needed and using patterns like the anchor include pattern to keep things light along the way, a responsive site can look beautiful and load quickly.

当有人构建一个4MB响应站点时，应将其归咎于实施。 没有理由为什么响应式设计不能表现良好。 如果您花时间仔细地从基础体验中进行构建，仅根据需要加载资产，并使用锚点(anchor)包含模式来使整个过程变得轻松，则响应式站点可以看起来很漂亮并可以快速加载。

When someone builds a site and uses server-side detection to exclude some browsers or devices from the experience, blame the implementation. There’s nothing evil about user agent detection. You don’t have to use it to segment experiences. In fact, it’s quite handy as a compliment to feature detection. Consider that some devices can make phone calls, and that those devices don’t all agree on the same protocol. Start with a smart default. Use server-side detection to try to determine which protocol should be used. If a value is reported use that. You’re enhancing the experience where you can and offering something usable where you can’t. There’s nothing wrong with that.

当有人建立站点并使用服务器端检测将某些浏览器或设备从体验中排除时，应归咎于实现。 用户代理检测没有什么坏处。 您无需使用它来细分体验。 实际上，它是对特征检测的一种补充。 考虑到某些设备可以拨打电话，而这些设备并非都同意同一协议。 从智能默认值开始。 使用服务器端检测来尝试确定应使用哪种协议。 如果报告了一个值，则使用该值。 您正在改善可以使用的体验，并在无法使用的地方提供可用的东西。 没有错。

The same goes for using hybrid applications, CSS preprocessors, text editors or any number of tools. They’re only as good as the person using them. If you get to know them, identify their strengths and weaknesses and use them when appropriate, they can be really powerful and helpful additions to your toolbox.

使用混合应用程序，CSS预处理器，文本编辑器或任何数量的工具也是如此。 它们仅与使用它们的人一样好。 如果您了解它们，确定它们的优点和缺点，并在适当的时候使用它们，它们对于您的工具箱可能是非常有用且有用的补充。

It’s all too easy to cling to the one or two tools we’re most comfortable with and discount the rest. Luca Passani hammered (no pun intended) this home in a recent post. He was discussing the oft-mentioned responsive web design (RWD) vs server-side detection debate and came to a very sound conclusion:

坚持使用我们最熟悉的一两个工具，然后打折其余的工具，实在太容易了。 卢卡·帕萨尼(Luca Passani)在最近的一篇文章中对这所房屋进行了锤打(无双关)。 他正在讨论经常提到的响应式Web设计(RWD)与服务器端检测的辩论，并得出了一个非常合理的结论：

In this context, isn’t the discussion between RWD and {device-detection} a direct corollary of the old “when all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail”? and of course, doesn’t this apply also the other way around, with backend developers favoring a solution to device fragmentation that leverages the tools they know best?

在这种情况下，RWD和{device-detection}之间的讨论不是旧的“当您拥有的只是锤子，每个问题都像钉子”的直接推论吗？ 当然，这是否也不会反过来适用？后端开发人员偏爱利用他们最了解的工具的设备碎片化解决方案？

Experiment with techniques before you condemn them. Find out for yourself if the tool is really where the blame should be placed.

在谴责技术之前，先尝试一下技术。 自己找出工具是否真的应归咎于此。

Building great experiences on the web isn’t getting any easier. We need all the tools we can get. Don’t discredit them simply because someone uses them poorly.

在网络上积累出色的经验并没有变得越来越容易。 我们需要我们可以获得的所有工具。 不要仅仅因为有人使用不当而抹黑他们。

翻译自: https://timkadlec.com/2012/10/blame-the-implementation-not-the-technique/

老是抱怨责怪他人