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

Google Closure Library has been archived

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 89 posts

Re: Google Closure Library has been archived

#61

Post by adrianh »

MisterKent wrote: post #35

Has anyone outside of Google had any luck using the closure compiler with a modern-ish stack with the advanced optimizations? Tsickle and the like seem to be archived as well, so it's unclear to me. Google must internally have some tooling to go from ts to closureJS?

Yes, I've used Closure Compiler with advanced optimizations for the Soundslice JS codebase, for around 10 years.

It is so, so good!

You have to take care to write code in a certain way, but once you understand the constrants it's not a big deal. The advanced optimizations are better than anything else I've seen in the JS world, and it's not even close. It's just insanely good.

Re: Google Closure Library has been archived

#63

Post by MisterKent »

thayne wrote: post #49
MisterKent wrote: post #35

Has anyone outside of Google had any luck using the closure compiler with a modern-ish stack with the advanced optimizations? Tsickle and the like seem to be archived as well, so it's unclear to me. Google must internally have some tooling to go from ts to closureJS?

tsickle doesn't look archived to me: https://github.com/angular/tsickle Lucid Software migrated their code from closure compiler JS to typescript, and continue to use the closure compiler with advanced optimizations. See https://lucid.co/techblog/2017/11/16/converting-600k-lines-t... . It would not at all surprise me if google internally has better tooling than what they have open sourced though.

Did you not see the readme in that repo? It's no longer being maintained, with the last commit being years ago.

I imagine it's lacking a lot of typescripts newer features etc. seems hard to justify using it

Re: Google Closure Library has been archived

#64

Post by cpcallen »

MisterKent wrote: post #45
esprehn wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They archived the open source parts , but it's the same stack internally.

So they just stopped sharing it publicly? That's kinda odd.

Doing open source releases takes engineering time, and the internal tooling teams are amongst those that have been hit by layoffs[1], so keeping GitHub up to date is probably not a big priority for them.

[1]: https://techcrunch.com/2024/05/01/google-lays-off-staff-from...

Re: Google Closure Library has been archived

#65

Post by djbusby »

oersted wrote: post #59
immibis wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least Microsoft's names are more descriptive than average. Microsoft Windows is an OS all about Windows; Microsoft Teams is a collaboration thing. And the whole company is called "microcomputer software". Microsoft Visual Studio is where you paint and sketch... But yes, we've had flat names and flat icons for ages. It seems there's more supply of entrepreneurship than demand, so you can't call your thing what it d…

> Microsoft Visual Studio is where you paint and sketch It's a code IDE, there's very little visual about it. It's a legacy name relating to Visual Basic, I believe it started as a code editor tightly integrated with a visual native UI editor.

Visual Studio 6 had all that - c1998

Re: Google Closure Library has been archived

#66

Post by swannodette »

zeroclicks wrote: post #60
dannyobrien wrote: post #4

Note that this doesn't include the Closure Compiler[0], and doesn't affect Clojurescript[1], which has traditionally used the compiler and related bits of the Google Closure library. [0] https://github.com/google/closure-library/issues/1214 [1] https://clojurescript.org/news/2024-01-24-release

Are you sure about that? The clojurescript implementation is built on top of the google closure library. Here's an example: https://github.com/clojure/clojurescript/blob/master/src/mai...

The implementation really is not built on top of GCL, the bulk of the standard library is persistent datastructure implementation and functional apis. The few cases here and there like `goog.string` can be removed over time. But really what's the rush? Large portions of GCL have worked unchanged for nearly two decades. Does Google archiving GCL make perfectly good code stop working?

When we eventually remove the direct GCL dependency it will sadly be more for optics than anything else.

Re: Google Closure Library has been archived

#68

Post by rty32 »

dannyobrien wrote: post #4

Note that this doesn't include the Closure Compiler[0], and doesn't affect Clojurescript[1], which has traditionally used the compiler and related bits of the Google Closure library. [0] https://github.com/google/closure-library/issues/1214 [1] https://clojurescript.org/news/2024-01-24-release

Closure Compiler is half dead anyway, doesn't even support public/private class fields etc from ES2022. I wouldn't be surprised if its gets abandoned within 1-2 years

Re: Google Closure Library has been archived

#69

Post by kccqzy »

MisterKent wrote: post #35

Has anyone outside of Google had any luck using the closure compiler with a modern-ish stack with the advanced optimizations? Tsickle and the like seem to be archived as well, so it's unclear to me. Google must internally have some tooling to go from ts to closureJS?

A long time ago when I was a full-stack developer, my opinion was that the Closure compiler with its advanced optimizations was so worthwhile that I was willing to change my code style to make it work. That includes not using new JS features not supported by the compiler.

But then again my introduction to JS was Douglas Crockford's JavaScript: The Good Parts and I write a lot of C++ so I'm always content with the idea of using only a subset of the language.

Re: Google Closure Library has been archived

#70

Post by no_wizard »

AshleysBrain wrote: post #56
MisterKent wrote: post #35

Has anyone outside of Google had any luck using the closure compiler with a modern-ish stack with the advanced optimizations? Tsickle and the like seem to be archived as well, so it's unclear to me. Google must internally have some tooling to go from ts to closureJS?

We relied on Closure Compiler for years, but we're now moving off it to ESBuild + UglifyJS. Closure has the most advanced minification, but these days it's not well maintained - it's lacking support for modern JavaScript features like dynamic imports and private fields, it's not clear when or if any of that will be supported, releases have reduced to every ~6 months, and all too often if you file a bug the response i…

You should consider terser over uglifyJS, it’s far better maintained and will get you the same if not better results
Post reply on HN