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

Deno 1.6 supports compiling TypeScript to a single executable

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 284 posts

Re: Deno 1.6 supports compiling TypeScript to a single executable

#151

Post by oorza »

205g0 wrote: post #145
j1elo wrote: post #29

I've been using vercel/pkg with great success, in order to achieve a similar target and package a whole application into a standalone executable: https://github.com/vercel/pkg This can be useful for people wanting to do this with Node. It's nice to have a single file that can be started right away without any external dependency. And also, it prevents from having to distribute the full sources. Kudos to the Deno devs…

What I like about not integrating the build-step as Deno does: You allow competition and the market comes up with great ideas like Vercel did with pkg. Building TS projects is quite demanding and I doubt if one party monopolizes this important step and thinks it does the best job it will degenerate an ecosystem. Even the TS team says the build system is not the core of their work, they just have one for convenience b…

Why anyone would look at the litany of mistakes that is npm and Node, then look at Deno and all of the same developers learning nothing except how to implement its "hurr durr URL loading code is cool" approach to security and think "this a good idea" is beyond me.

I appreciate Deno because I can ask job interview candidates what their thoughts are about it, and when candidates for senior positions don't point out any of the billion obvious reasons it's a stupid project for stupid people, it saves me a ton of time. Otherwise, it's a waste of time and effort, and all you have to do to convince yourself of that is look at the contribution history of the most prominent contributors on github.

I have never, not once, in my life as a developer wanted a project to die so badly.

Re: Deno 1.6 supports compiling TypeScript to a single executable

#152

Post by ausjke »

galaxyLogic wrote: post #40
j1elo wrote: post #29

I've been using vercel/pkg with great success, in order to achieve a similar target and package a whole application into a standalone executable: https://github.com/vercel/pkg This can be useful for people wanting to do this with Node. It's nice to have a single file that can be started right away without any external dependency. And also, it prevents from having to distribute the full sources. Kudos to the Deno devs…

I'm using vercel/pkg as well. I have a Node.js server which generates HTML and opens a browser on Windows which then asks the server for that html at 127.0.0.1. So browser will be my GUI and Node.js packaged with vercel/pkg my back-end. It is more flexible than say Electron because GUI can be anything I want it to be. My concern is only will users accept a local server running on their desktop. I've tried to configur…

in this case why not just use go-binary as the backend? go is natively designed to be single executable and you don't need any package tools, and it does everything node.js can do on your OS while using your browser as a GUI frontend.

Re: Deno 1.6 supports compiling TypeScript to a single executable

#153

Post by cjonas »

oorza wrote: post #151
205g0 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I like about not integrating the build-step as Deno does: You allow competition and the market comes up with great ideas like Vercel did with pkg. Building TS projects is quite demanding and I doubt if one party monopolizes this important step and thinks it does the best job it will degenerate an ecosystem. Even the TS team says the build system is not the core of their work, they just have one for convenience b…

Why anyone would look at the litany of mistakes that is npm and Node, then look at Deno and all of the same developers learning nothing except how to implement its "hurr durr URL loading code is cool" approach to security and think "this a good idea" is beyond me. I appreciate Deno because I can ask job interview candidates what their thoughts are about it, and when candidates for senior positions don't point out any…

With an attitude like yours, I think it's the candidates who saved a ton of time...

Re: Deno 1.6 supports compiling TypeScript to a single executable

#154

Post by mssundaram »

oorza wrote: post #151
205g0 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I like about not integrating the build-step as Deno does: You allow competition and the market comes up with great ideas like Vercel did with pkg. Building TS projects is quite demanding and I doubt if one party monopolizes this important step and thinks it does the best job it will degenerate an ecosystem. Even the TS team says the build system is not the core of their work, they just have one for convenience b…

Why anyone would look at the litany of mistakes that is npm and Node, then look at Deno and all of the same developers learning nothing except how to implement its "hurr durr URL loading code is cool" approach to security and think "this a good idea" is beyond me. I appreciate Deno because I can ask job interview candidates what their thoughts are about it, and when candidates for senior positions don't point out any…

I'm reading your post in Derek Zoolander's voice when he sees the model that Mugato had made.

> What is this? A center for ants?

Re: Deno 1.6 supports compiling TypeScript to a single executable

#155

Post by cjonas »

jjnoakes wrote: post #70
Couto wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reminds me of the server that Zoom used to have. Accepting connections only from 127.0.0.1, alone, isn't enough, since any request from the browser would match that IP, even if the request was being made through a XSS attack. I'm sure someone with more knowledge in security would better chime in.

What I do is generate a random token, pass it to the browser I spawn, and only accept requests that include the token.

Wouldn't proper CORS be enough? I guess you would have to avoid putting any sensitive data in GET requests

Re: Deno 1.6 supports compiling TypeScript to a single executable

#156

Post by birdsbirdsbirds »

oorza wrote: post #151
205g0 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I like about not integrating the build-step as Deno does: You allow competition and the market comes up with great ideas like Vercel did with pkg. Building TS projects is quite demanding and I doubt if one party monopolizes this important step and thinks it does the best job it will degenerate an ecosystem. Even the TS team says the build system is not the core of their work, they just have one for convenience b…

Why anyone would look at the litany of mistakes that is npm and Node, then look at Deno and all of the same developers learning nothing except how to implement its "hurr durr URL loading code is cool" approach to security and think "this a good idea" is beyond me. I appreciate Deno because I can ask job interview candidates what their thoughts are about it, and when candidates for senior positions don't point out any…

Can you elaborate? What stands out to you in their contributions?

Re: Deno 1.6 supports compiling TypeScript to a single executable

#157

Post by brundolf »

oorza wrote: post #151
205g0 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I like about not integrating the build-step as Deno does: You allow competition and the market comes up with great ideas like Vercel did with pkg. Building TS projects is quite demanding and I doubt if one party monopolizes this important step and thinks it does the best job it will degenerate an ecosystem. Even the TS team says the build system is not the core of their work, they just have one for convenience b…

Why anyone would look at the litany of mistakes that is npm and Node, then look at Deno and all of the same developers learning nothing except how to implement its "hurr durr URL loading code is cool" approach to security and think "this a good idea" is beyond me. I appreciate Deno because I can ask job interview candidates what their thoughts are about it, and when candidates for senior positions don't point out any…

Who hurt you?

Re: Deno 1.6 supports compiling TypeScript to a single executable

#158

Post by 14u2c »

nikisweeting wrote: post #76
bartlomieju wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing preventing you from still using a central repository (or its mirrors). I highly recommend "Deno is a Browser for Code" by Kitson [1] which discusses this subject in more depth. [1] https://kitsonkelly.com/posts/deno-is-a-browser-for-code/

Hmm I don't find this article very convincing. From my perspective this is a security and sysadmin nightmare (for the reasons in my link above). Lockfiles actually provide repeatable builds almost all the time, the only times they fail are when depending on non-JS builds like node-gyp or other C++/etc dependencies where you can't lock on system build tooling versions because they're outside the scope of what npm can…

You are still not thinking of it as a browser. Consider a use case where Deno is the client, not the server. One example is a replacement for piping random curls into bash:

deno run --allow-write=~/.myapp https://myapp.io/install.ts

It works quite well as secure scripting runtime.

Re: Deno 1.6 supports compiling TypeScript to a single executable

#159

Post by greggman3 »

zubairq wrote: post #103
miohtama wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WebAssembly fixes this.

Not really as the WASM version of Sqlite is memory only and cannot write to disk. Please feel free to correct me if this has changed though

I don't know all the issues but AFAICT wasm is just executing code. The libraries you provide for it are up to you. So if you so, for example, thinking of node, if I expose `fs.openSync` `fs.readSync`, `fs.writeSync` and `fs.closeSync` what's missing that wasm can't write to disk?

Re: Deno 1.6 supports compiling TypeScript to a single executable

#160

Post by mkj »

loosescrews wrote: post #106
hetman wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rust has supported statically linking to MSVC and musl for a while now but also added static glibc support on Linux very recently: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/77386

Is it possible to compile with statically linked musl with the pre-built Rust toolchain on a standard glibc based distribution?

Yes, it works well. The main caveat I've found is you need the rustls feature of packages rather than openssl. Though perhaps that was more related to cross compiling for Arm.
Post reply on HN