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

A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 203 posts

Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers

#91

Post by mortdeus »

kbenson wrote: post #10

I 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…

we have wasm now. why is anybody writing anything in javascript ever nowadays? some form of religious self chastisement?

Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers

#93

Post by mortdeus »

guessmyname wrote: post #71
jordigh wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only attack I feel is calling C/C++ a language. It's two languages and we don't like each other very much. People who spend a lot of time trying to write good C++ avoid much of C's bread and butter like malloc and free, and the general hatred of C++ from C developers is well-documented. I happen to prefer C++ to C and D to both.

I have never treated "C/C++" as the name of a single language. I always read it as "C and/or C++".

You can consider them the same in the sense that they are the guys with the biggest cocks on the block.

Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers

#94

Post by krapp »

mortdeus wrote: post #91
kbenson wrote: post #10

I 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…

we have wasm now. why is anybody writing anything in javascript ever nowadays? some form of religious self chastisement?

wasm isn't quite ready yet. It requires a javascript layer for interacting with the DOM, which is slower than plain javascript, and it doesn't support features like garbage collection which would make it a good target for some languages.

Also, javascript is plaintext and doesn't require a compile step, even though for some reason (cough Node) javascript development usually does, which makes it much more convenient for its original intended use case (a scripting language for the web) than wasm.

Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers

#95

Post by pseudalopex »

taeric wrote: post #42
bartread wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

A large part, I believe, is the ease of moving a git repository around. Back in the day, the central repository was a choice that stuck you to it for a long time. You literally had to setup the server, in many cases. Git, though? You just install the client and you can get started on a repository in your current directory that can easily transition to a remote hosted one. So, in a way, it is not unlike pathogen sprea…

Mercurial had major projects too. Mozilla still uses it. What it didn't have was GitHub.

Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers

#96

Post by krapp »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #24
finchisko wrote: post #15

Earlier 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...

> ... but there is chance it will be found... Doesn't this completely ignore YAGNI?

We do what we must because we can.

Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers

#97

Post by sidlls »

dfabulich wrote: post #11
kbenson wrote: post #10

I 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…

IMO, this is because there's a general attitude about porting to Rust that porting to Rust, by itself, makes a material improvement in the quality of the software (e.g. reliability, performance, readability), and that these improvements that can't be achieved in C/C++. Entrenched C developers then rise to the debate to defend their language. This debate has happened often enough that any time someone ports something…

I think you're eliding a lot of context here. Specifically the context of overzealous Rust fans. There's a strong, though not universal or even majority sentiment that "writing anything in C or C++ is basically the same as committing assault, murder, professional malpractice or other similar hyperbolic claim" that some Rust advocates engage in.

There's a whole meme about the "Rust Evangelism Strikeforce" on n-gate.com for a reason, and that reason is the community on HN has become a caricature of itself.

By the way, this is from a person who made a point to introduce Rust to the team, when even just a year or so ago I'd have preferred C++.

Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers

#98

Post by jvilk »

mr_toad wrote: post #80
ronjouch wrote: post #51

Looking at this rewrite I was wondering, but didn't find an answer in the project README: would emscripten successfully compile Git to js/wasm?

Git has its claws deep in the file system. On the browser side, JS and wasm have very limited access to the file system. You’d need to somehow bridge that gap. (It looks like isomorphic-git is using indexdb, and not the file system). There’s probably other dependencies (ssh, http, an editor for commits) that need to be resolved to get expected functionality.

You're right; when it is running in the browser, isomorphic-git does not have access to the operating system's file system. Instead, it uses BrowserFS [1], which emulates a file system abstraction on top of arbitrary storage backends. It supports IndexedDB, localStorage, and Dropbox, among others. (Disclaimer: I am the author of BrowserFS.)

[1] https://github.com/jvilk/BrowserFS

Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers

#99

Post by fineline »

bluejekyll wrote: post #88
zeth___ wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Javascript runs everywhere where there is a browser. Rust runs everywhere where there is a c compiler, which is funnily enough the sample places that C/C++ run.

And with wasm, Rust/C/C++ all can run in the browser too...

JS in the browser has direct integration to the DOM, networking, various local data persistence APIs, and other IO and sensors (webcam, accelerometer...) etc. Rust can be compiled to run in a sandbox, which can then be integrated via a remote call interface with the JS layer, and thus be indirectly (via JS) connected to the above APIs, but there are currently concerns around the performance of this approach. Rust cannot independently manage a web page which hosts it, without JS. There is some way to go before browsers support practical, accessible and performant front-end web apps in Rust.

Re: A pure JavaScript implementation of Git for Node and browsers

#100

Post by jordigh »

guessmyname wrote: post #71
jordigh wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only attack I feel is calling C/C++ a language. It's two languages and we don't like each other very much. People who spend a lot of time trying to write good C++ avoid much of C's bread and butter like malloc and free, and the general hatred of C++ from C developers is well-documented. I happen to prefer C++ to C and D to both.

I have never treated "C/C++" as the name of a single language. I always read it as "C and/or C++".

They are so often spoken of in the same breath in ways that other languages are not, that I think a lot of people do forget that they are not the same thing nor even that culturally close.
Post reply on HN