Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I've Just Liberated My Modules

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 827 posts

Re: I've Just Liberated My Modules

#471

Post by karmelapple »

esailija wrote: post #439
karmelapple wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, no, but even if it did, what if a bug is found in the future? The community fixes the bug, not necessarily you!

The possibility of having bugs in code you don't control (that usually has a clause for no warranties) is an argument for implementing it yourself, not against it. Don't forget how hard it is to get a maintainer even agree on whether something is 1. a bug 2. that needs to be fixed.

If someone already wrote the base code, we can always fork it and fix a bug or add a feature ourselves if it runs contrary to what the original authors desires.

Re: I've Just Liberated My Modules

#472

Post by ars »

Klathmon wrote: post #257
takno wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Realistically 17 lines of code is total overkill for this function. In many cases you could achieve the same thing more efficiently in a single line.

Feel free to show a smaller implementation that's more efficient. I've seen several "one liners" in this thread already, and most of them either blow up when something that's not a string is passed in (regardless of how you view strict typing, js doesn't have it and this shouldn't happen), or are extremely slow comparatively (most of them creating and destroying an array every time they are called). Plus this has 100…

> Feel free to show a smaller implementation that's more efficient.

How's this:

  function leftpad (str, len, ch) {
    ch = (len -= str.length)  0) ch += ch[0];
 
    return ch + String(str);
  }
No local variables, less manipulation of the input string, the string grows at the tail which is more efficient, and the code is much shorter.

(With a bit of work you can use the longer ch string that is built to reduce the number of string appends even more by appending multiple characters at once. Although probably not worth it for this function.)

Re: I've Just Liberated My Modules

#473

Post by laughinghan »

jsprogrammer wrote: post #48
felixrieseberg wrote: post #21

Azer has contributed awesome modules to the community, but such a move _obviously_ messes with a bunch of people who previously didn't trust npm, but Azer. Npm works fine. There might be issues with it, but the reason builds are failing right now is that he decided to unpublish all of them - in a move that feels very kneejerky, despite him claiming that it's the opposite. If this had been actually in the interest of…

Didn't NPM break builds by completely swapping out the contents of a known module ? Obviously NPM should not be relied on, but this really makes the case. NPM will arbitrarily modify packages without notice -- this could be the unwinding of NPM.

> For the record they made sure the exact same code was published to 0.0.3 so that I didn't maliciously inject anything.

(elsewhere in this thread)

Re: I've Just Liberated My Modules

#474

Post by _ZeD_ »

cballard wrote: post #63
larkinrichards wrote: post #31

I applaud this action and while I'd like to point the finger at NPM, there's no real other method to fix historical package versions that depend on this. It is worth pointing to the silly state of NPM packages: Who decided that an external dependency was necessary for a module that is 17 lines of code? module.exports = leftpad; function leftpad (str, len, ch) { str = String(str); var i = -1; if (!ch && ch !== 0) ch =…

> Developers: less dependencies is better, especially when they're so simple! No! The opposite of that. Lots of little µframeworks, defining composable and generic types, is much better than a giant monolith. The Swift Package Manager is taking this approach, and I think it's great: https://github.com/apple/swift-package-manager#modules The caret character doesn't appear anywhere in the semver spec, so whatever that…

...and I am in my little python world with "batteries included"...

Re: I've Just Liberated My Modules

#475

Post by iopq »

ubernostrum wrote: post #423
indiv0 wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about a blockchain-based NPM? Can't take all the computers down. Legal, shmegal.

You can still be jailed for contempt of the order, though. "I've found a clever workaround for court orders" doesn't work around that bit.

OK, now tell me how you can remove this file from BitTorrent (it's Fedora 18 KDE)

magnet:?xt=urn:btih:14f146cdfaef83951ca9d3ac647e18e1977d1367

I'll wait

Re: I've Just Liberated My Modules

#476

Post by smt88 »

marshray wrote: post #433
slgeorge wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't have anything to do with the API. Kik (the company) registered the name and have rights to the name. Technically, Kik (the company) registered their trademark in the class "Computer Software" [0]. That means that no-one else can use the word Kik (and the logo) for this class of activity. The key issue is when the registration happened. Since they've been going since 2009, and Kik (the software project) onl…

> Everyone knows the example of Spam. Please show an example of someone other than Hormel Foods Corporation marketing a meat product using any derivative of the name 'Spam' and getting away with it.

Spam was mentioned because it's a brand name that became generic because it wasn't protected aggressively enough. Coke, Xerox, and Kleenex are other classic examples of brands that are commonly used generically, and the company owning their trademarks must aggressively send threats (that they rarely follow up on) just out of legal necessity.

Re: I've Just Liberated My Modules

#477

Post by Havvy »

smsm42 wrote: post #347
maxaf wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking an idea to the logical extreme is an effective means of invalidating said idea. How many UNIX utilities are 17 silly lines long? A bit of code duplication would go a long way towards bringing sanity to JS land.

I wonder how long /usr/bin/true source is.

On Linux, it's 30ish lines, with half of those there to make false.c able to reuse some code. (I know, it's stupid.)

In OpenBSD, it's 3 LoC IIRC.

Re: I've Just Liberated My Modules

#478

Post by ubernostrum »

iopq wrote: post #475
ubernostrum wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can still be jailed for contempt of the order, though. "I've found a clever workaround for court orders" doesn't work around that bit.

OK, now tell me how you can remove this file from BitTorrent (it's Fedora 18 KDE) magnet:?xt=urn:btih:14f146cdfaef83951ca9d3ac647e18e1977d1367 I'll wait

It's not about whether the removal is logistically possible, it's about whether a court can punish someone for failing to carry out the removal.

Even when the former is actually impossible, a court could still punish for the latter. "Ha ha ha I use technology to cleverly show how futile your orders are" is not the kind of thing you want to say to a court with broad contempt powers.

Re: I've Just Liberated My Modules

#479

Post by tempestn »

jhall1468 wrote: post #440
overgard wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Apple thing doesn't work though, for a specific reason: it's a very common word/name. Smith is a very common surname. If one person starts the Smith Automobile Company and another person starts the Smith Farm, obviously there's no issue there. That's because none of us invented "Smith", it's understood to be a common name, etc. On the other hand, if I start "The Google Paper Company", I'm pretty damn sure I would…

That is not how trademarks work. Feel free to start the Google Paper Co. Uniqueness is not a merit for trademark infringement. To infringe you have to be a competitor.

That is incorrect. You are also infringing if people could reasonably assume an affiliation due to your use of the trademark, which would definitely be the case with Google Paper Co. You're basically piggy-backing on (and diluting) the brand recognition they've built.

Re: I've Just Liberated My Modules

#480

Post by jsprogrammer »

profmonocle wrote: post #204
jsprogrammer wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An NPM package name is just what NPM scraped from a package.json file.

The technical details of how package names enter their system aren't really relevant from a legal point of view.

I believe that is what I said.

> There are no legal claims to be made over NPM package names.

Post reply on HN