Node v4.0.0
91–100 of 277 posts
Re: Node v4.0.0
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's difficult to use it for anything serious without investing a lot of time into it. Isn't that true for many platforms? Either way, I have multiple apps running Node in production, and I've never had the issues described. You don't have to be as breakneck as Node itself - some things I have are still running v0.10x just fine.
> Isn't that true for many platforms? I would say that the ROI is lower for time spent learning Node. I've found that with all the other languages I've learnt, in a couple of days I've been able to build something useful, leave it running in production and reuse skills learned a year later. With Node, even the name of the language is not stable! A few weeks back I went to install Zombie, and now I have to install ioj…
I'd agree with your first paragraph in that Node is a bit lower-level out of the box and probably takes more effort to get started building a web-app, but I think the time invested jumping in at that low-level is actually useful vs diving in at a higher 'framework level' with some of the other popular web languages.
Also it does have superior installer/package-manager/deployment stories compared to say ... Python & Django, which does have an impact on ROI.
Re: Node v4.0.0
#93Re: Node v4.0.0
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
The leading 0 denotes probable instability in the API that devs are willing to take the risk for and act upon.
You're familiar with SemVer, aren't you?
Re: Node v4.0.0
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 s…
Your previous comments address the paradox-of-choice idea, but the uncontroversial path in Node is to 'just use Express' right? How it that a worse situation than in other languages where there are also trendy frameworks competing against the default option. You name PHP as a better situation but from what I gather PHP is even worse at casting off legacy frameworks. Laravel is the new trendy, whereas it was CodeIgniter/Symphony before that and EE/Wordpress before that. And in Ruby, there's similar competition over an alternative to Rails [0].
[0] https://blog.engineyard.com/2015/life-beyond-rails-brief-loo...
Re: Node v4.0.0
#96Earlier 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…
I mean, Ruby was created in 1995, Python in 1991. Node was first released in 2009. That's not an entirely fair comparison since, of course, JavaScript was created long before Node, but Node introduced the language to a new environment, and a lot of complications needed (and in some cases, still need) to be sorted out. As for no recommend approach - that's deliberate. I don't think most people working on Node want a R…
There are plenty of libraries that provide whatever level of support you want, but one big reason people seem to use Node is for the ease of the DIY process. Honestly, I don't need an all-in-one system, because my system has needs that aren't easily modeled in ActiveRecord (or at least weren't during Rails 3 days when I moved over to Node). Instead, I am doing mix-and-match with smaller libraries to help database access, realtime (websocket) services, OAUTH, and a trad REST backend.
I also think it's fair to compare the release of node and the release date of ruby or python - it was really only then that we can start talking about needing frameworks for building web applications that run in the javascript language, whereas the other two languages could have done so right away (or ... later, once the web application world became more than just a cgi gateway on top of a c++ stack, like the lunch menu randomizer I had running back in 1995). Still, no matter how you slice it, node and server-side javascript are still relatively new on the scene, and not necessarily well-suited for an all-in-wonder, highly-opinionated framework.
Re: Node v4.0.0
#97Is there more information on what's holding back this build?
Re: Node v4.0.0
#98Earlier 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…
I can't reply to the grand-child of this post, so here's my reply. It seems that you don't like Node and are intent not to use it. I respect that and am not trying to push it. I think asynchronous programming in the reactor pattern is a good solution pattern for many types of problems, and Node.js is a solid application of that pattern. But it certainly is more complicated than synchronous programming in the kinds of…
Asynchronous programming a la Node (with callbacks etc) is an anti-pattern.
We've had better ways to handle that for 4 decades now.
Re: Node v4.0.0
#99This is great news. I'm especially excited about the new ECMA6 features (arrows, etc.)
Now I just need to be able to rely on these features being present in the browser so I can just write native ES6 everywhere and skip that build step entirely.
Re: Node v4.0.0
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 s…
So, if you think that Ruby or Python could get things done for you and you're very familiar with them, go for either and get it done but to pick on Node just because you don't quite grasp its inner workings is really odd of you and the whole reasoning behind your critique is rather absurd.