Why oh why?
"Everything that can be written in JavaScript will eventually be written in JavaScript"
A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers
31–40 of 203 posts
Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers
#32I think it's interesting how there's two phenomena that seem to be related to me that get posted here and seem to get treated with different responses. One the one hand, we have software originally written in C/C++ being rewritten in Rust (not often, sometimes just conceptualized), and there's often a real push back by some people about how it's a waste and not useful. On the other, we have software rewritten in Java…
Understand your frustration. But on positive hand, javascript opens new opportunities like using git in the browser (even though meaningful use case is yet to be shown, but there is chance it will be found). On other hand rust implementation brings "just better security" (using sarcasm here for brevity). Yes, it probably could be ported to js (wasm) too, but until somebody does that...
> (even though meaningful use case is yet to be shown, but there is chance it will be found)
A thought is a browser-based IDE, with a cloud filestore (OneDrive, Dropbox, Google One/Drive (my new preferred stylization of their product)) for repo and dev environment.
Think of it like a browser-ified version of what you might do with a server and SSH.
We've got a couple JS-based editors/IDEs. We've got many cloud storage options. Now you can put git directly in browser, too. Heck, you could make a SPA and save the whole source as a file on your cloud storage - just open that up in any browser and access other files in that account (or others). Don't even carry a USB around, and still have your custom dev environment on any PC.
Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers
#33Soon, there will be a rewrite of the Linux kernel in Javascript.
Finally, a way to run Linux in your browser!
Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers
#34I think it's interesting how there's two phenomena that seem to be related to me that get posted here and seem to get treated with different responses. One the one hand, we have software originally written in C/C++ being rewritten in Rust (not often, sometimes just conceptualized), and there's often a real push back by some people about how it's a waste and not useful. On the other, we have software rewritten in Java…
[deleted]
Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers
#35"Any application that can be written in JavaScript, will eventually be written in JavaScript." -- Atwood's Law
we should just implement js in js and go full circle already.
Done, by Brendan Eich, in 2004: https://github.com/mozilla/narcissus/
Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers
#36Soon, there will be a rewrite of the Linux kernel in Javascript. Finally, a way to run Linux in your browser!
Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Understand your frustration. But on positive hand, javascript opens new opportunities like using git in the browser (even though meaningful use case is yet to be shown, but there is chance it will be found). On other hand rust implementation brings "just better security" (using sarcasm here for brevity). Yes, it probably could be ported to js (wasm) too, but until somebody does that...
> (even though meaningful use case is yet to be shown, but there is chance it will be found) A thought is a browser-based IDE, with a cloud filestore (OneDrive, Dropbox, Google One/Drive (my new preferred stylization of their product)) for repo and dev environment. Think of it like a browser-ified version of what you might do with a server and SSH. We've got a couple JS-based editors/IDEs. We've got many cloud storag…
I'm on a team whose primary project is a browser-based IDE.
We are considering this for exactly the reason you said.
Probably won't implement it because the whole "choose your own FS, also it doesn't work on github" thing, but we might plug it into our node server and writeup an API for our client to use.
Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers
#38I think it's interesting how there's two phenomena that seem to be related to me that get posted here and seem to get treated with different responses. One the one hand, we have software originally written in C/C++ being rewritten in Rust (not often, sometimes just conceptualized), and there's often a real push back by some people about how it's a waste and not useful. On the other, we have software rewritten in Java…
Understand your frustration. But on positive hand, javascript opens new opportunities like using git in the browser (even though meaningful use case is yet to be shown, but there is chance it will be found). On other hand rust implementation brings "just better security" (using sarcasm here for brevity). Yes, it probably could be ported to js (wasm) too, but until somebody does that...
> even though meaningful use case is yet to be shown, but there is chance it will be found
I don't get the Rust-port-hate, but I think you nailed the JS case with this comment. A few years ago my immediate reaction to JavaScript ports (or equivalents) used to be something roughly akin to, "what the eff is the point of that?!?"
Still, enough times now I've found myself needing one of these things later on - the most recent example being something that can play Amiga mod files in a browser - that I've become a bit more broad-minded. Plus, of course these things can be fun learning exercises and, after all, why not?
Really, one of the most canonical examples, for me, has to be Google Docs, which is basically a cut-down Microsoft Office in a browser. Back in the day I thought this was a terrible idea but, you know what? I've used Google Docs quite a lot over the past few years. It's still hasn't replaced MS Office, and probably never will because (as far as I can see) Excel simply can't be beat.
Our main current Google Docs use case is running retros. We have a few remote team members, plus a fairly strong WFH culture, so a shared GDocs drawing makes a great canvas/virtual whiteboard. Granted it's not as good as a dedicated virtual whiteboard app, but it's a very cost effective way of giving everyone write access to a shared drawing/post-it surface on an occasional/periodic basis. The problem with virtual whiteboards is they tend to charge per user, which makes sense if everyone uses them all the time, but becomes cost prohibitive when most people only need the app once every couple of weeks.
There are also plenty of examples for me that still don't seem to make much sense (online IDEs) but, whatever, some people clearly do, and that's cool.
Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
we should just implement js in js and go full circle already.
Just wait for the Electron browser...
Given the somewhat non-awesome performance and resource requirements of some of the Electron apps out there, waiting might end up as the defining experience of an Electron browser.
Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers
#40I did something similar a few years ago. https://github.com/ryanackley/git-html5.js . A lot of the links don't work in the README anymore. It was more of a "this would be cool!" project rather than a library I wanted everyone to use for the next 20 years. One of things that scared me is the responsibility that bugs in something like this could be catastrophic to someone's work. As I built my git library I realized a…
I can't begin to describe how sad I am that we didn't end up using mercurial everywhere.
It's really strange to me that nowadays source control seems to be, largely, a monoculture. Back in the day I either used, or knew plenty of people using any of CVS, Subversion, Sourcesafe, Sourcegear Vault, Perforce, AccuRev, ClearCase, along with a few others.
Whilst distributed version control is a huge leap forward over many of those older systems, it's odd that nowadays it seems to be git or, well, nothing. I'm surprised Mercurial hasn't made more headway than it has.
But maybe git is just "good enough" for most people? I suppose that's where I land on it. It has it's frustrations, like anything else, but I can live with them.