Why is D3 so Verbose?

Note: the example is a misconception and not what's meant by "binding to data." In D3, binding to data refers to using the `.data()` method to supply an object (typically an array) which you can then use in a function callback in the accessors, so like `.attr('x1', d => /* access the item here */)`. This allows you to easily and intuitively bind a dataset to a graphical representation and use its attributes to inform the properties of the visualization.

I'd also argue that D3 is no more verbose than vanilla JS (at least for this example). What's the alternative for creating a line in SVG?

    const line = document.createElementNS('http://www.w3.org/2000/svg', 'line')
    line.setAttribute('x1', ...)
    line.setAttribute('y1', ...)
    line.setAttribute('x2', ...)
    line.setAttribute('y2', ...)
    // etc
    document.querySelector('svg').appendChild(line)

All right, I got nerdsniped into writing a "yes and" sort of thing even though I agree with the gist of this article :) https://macwright.com/2025/08/21/why-d3-is-so-verbose-anothe...

More granular control, more verbosity.

I am still proud of the D3 gadget I made about 8 years back as a green web dev. Couldn't have made it any other way, not sure if I could with any other library today. Wouldn't want to do it again, though, unless I was a dedicated front-end guy.

recently i've been having a lot of success with working with d3 + solid.js. I use d3 as the data processing layer, and solid for actually rendering svgs from the data. the combination is lovely, you get all the power of d3, while the parts that usually end up verbose are written succinctly in jsx. and it's a lot less pain than doing it in react, because the mental models of solid/d3 feel much more aligned

I feel like D3 ought to be the for-computer substrate for libraries that are actually for humans.

I suppose it matters less now in the LLM age.

I love D3, but its a library not a language.

the author was inspired by early directx apis

This is why I've always found it weird that people consider D3 to be a charting tool. Yes, people have used it to build a lot of charts, but it's really just a streaming data processing tool. It doesn't provide anything specific to charting[0]. All of that part, you're still left to figure out on your own.

[0] At least in the core, I'm not too familiar with the full ecosystem and what is considered official in terms of plugins. Everytime I've tried to use it, I've not found the documentation leading me to using anything more specifically oriented towards charting.

D3 is painful, we don't have to appeal to authority to admit that.

Mike Bostock is an interesting person, and a case study in why don't design languages from a single person's genius.

I'd say because JavaScript is insufficiently expressive. No macros, no arrow operator, and the premier way of writing it 4x as verbose than what I'd consider reasonable. D3 is a great library though.