Live data from Hacker News

Node v4.0.0

nodejs.org

61–70 of 277 posts

Re: Node v4.0.0

#61

This is crazy fast shipment..almost scary that you have to start keeping up with all the changes.. For anyone who wants to upgrade either from node 0.12 or iojs 3.30..all you have to do is re-install it with the GUI installer and you're good to go..for your personal computer at least!

`nvm install v4.0.0` and you're ready to go.

Re: Node v4.0.0

#62
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that Node can and will become more stable. It feels like it has too much momentum not to. But until it does achieve stability, it's difficult to use it for anything serious without investing a lot of time into it. Perhaps Go is a better comparison than Ruby and Python.

in fact, to my surprise, I've just tested our app (v0.10.x in production) on v4.0.0 and all our unit tests pass, the server works... I'm amazed. A single module had to be bumped (Elasticsearch@8) while we directly rely on 50+ third party modules... Our npm-shrinkwrap is 2600 lines long. That's not really a sign of instability to me, but rather great work

You seemingly have much more experience with Node than me. Perhaps my amateur anecdotes are just bad luck, but certainly my Bash scripts that talk to Node break frequently.

Re: Node v4.0.0

#63
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there are two separate things in your comment: the recent instability is due to the leadership power struggle that has been resolved, but the "no recommended approach" problem is more the result of a philosophy that encourages tiny pieces, new ideas, and reinvention, which is both a blessing and a curse, and seems unlikely to change.

You can have both. An 'officially recommended approach' does not preclude 1000 unofficial but working approaches. However, it does it make it a lot easier for someone dipping their toes in. With Node for core and basic problems, I find myself thinking "Should I follow this blog post written by a highly respected developer but which is a year old and therefore forever in Node-land, or this blog post written last week…

When you say languages, do you really mean frameworks? It seems like languages are fairly general purpose and don't go out of their way to tell you how to build your application. Node is more in the "language" camp than the "framework" camp, and there are bunch of frameworks on top of it that give you the structure you're looking for.

Re: Node v4.0.0

#64
post #44
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As somebody who uses Node only at the periphery of my role (for things like the Zombie browser, and SASS parsing) the massive instability has put me off from relying on it for anything core. Documentation is quickly out of date, libraries seem to have incompatibilities which only become obvious when they don't work, there's no 'recommended' approach for even basic tasks. I won't pretend I'm speaking for everyone, as…

The Node ecosystem is a great example of the open source community. The large number of libraries released on npm, active participation of the community and frequent events around the world related to Node proves it. Besides of course the large list of companies using it. Not sure about your problems with node and the 'massive instability'issues you've had, or if they are related to a third party library and not the…

I meant stability not in the sense of 'frequently crashing', in the sense of the API and 'how things work' remaining the same over time.

Re: Node v4.0.0

#66
post #63
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can have both. An 'officially recommended approach' does not preclude 1000 unofficial but working approaches. However, it does it make it a lot easier for someone dipping their toes in. With Node for core and basic problems, I find myself thinking "Should I follow this blog post written by a highly respected developer but which is a year old and therefore forever in Node-land, or this blog post written last week…

When you say languages, do you really mean frameworks? It seems like languages are fairly general purpose and don't go out of their way to tell you how to build your application. Node is more in the "language" camp than the "framework" camp, and there are bunch of frameworks on top of it that give you the structure you're looking for.

Anything. I'm a pragmatic developer who just wants solutions that help me pay the bills. It's precisely for that reason that Node has been a problem for me - it's caused much more than its fair share of headaches, when compared to Ruby, Python, PHP, Bash, Go.

Perhaps using a framework would make things easier, but I'm reticent to rely on it in the main part of the project when it causes so many problems just in the small parts.

Re: Node v4.0.0

#67
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that Node can and will become more stable. It feels like it has too much momentum not to. But until it does achieve stability, it's difficult to use it for anything serious without investing a lot of time into it. Perhaps Go is a better comparison than Ruby and Python.

in fact, to my surprise, I've just tested our app (v0.10.x in production) on v4.0.0 and all our unit tests pass, the server works... I'm amazed. A single module had to be bumped (Elasticsearch@8) while we directly rely on 50+ third party modules... Our npm-shrinkwrap is 2600 lines long. That's not really a sign of instability to me, but rather great work

Most of the instability is related to compiled modules. Hopefully they'll be updated to support v4.0.0 shortly.

Re: Node v4.0.0

#69
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Servers don't use a GUI installer :P

Use your package manager to update then...

    $ cat /etc/issue
    Ubuntu 14.04.3 LTS \n \l

    $ apt-cache showpkg nodejs | head
    Package: nodejs
    Versions: 
    0.10.25~dfsg2-2ubuntu1 (/var/lib/apt/lists/us.archive.ubuntu.com_ubuntu_dists_trusty_universe_binary-amd64_Packages) (/var/lib/dpkg/status)
My package manager knows nothing of this mythical "bleeding edge" of which you speak...

Re: Node v4.0.0

#70
post #36

0.12.7 -> 4.0.0 Best versioning convention ever :)

Actually it went:

0.12.7 -> 1.0.0 -> 1.0.1 -> 1.0.2 -> 1.0.3 -> 1.0.4 -> 1.1.0 -> 1.2.0 -> 1.3.0 -> 1.4.1 -> 1.4.2 -> 1.4.3 -> 1.5.0 -> 1.5.1 -> 1.6.0 -> 1.6.1 -> 1.6.2 -> 1.6.3 -> 1.6.4 -> 1.7.1 -> 1.8.1 -> 1.8.2 -> 1.8.3 -> 1.8.4 -> 2.0.0 -> 2.0.1 -> 2.0.2 -> 2.1.0 -> 2.2.0 -> 2.2.1 -> 2.3.0 -> 2.3.1 -> 2.3.2 -> 2.3.3 -> 2.3.4 -> 2.4.0 -> 2.5.0 -> 3.0.0 -> 3.1.0 -> 3.2.0 -> 3.3.0 -> 4.0.0

You just weren't paying attention.

Post reply on HN