Live data from Hacker News

Deno 1.10 Release Notes

deno.com

101–110 of 157 posts

Re: Deno 1.10 Release Notes

#103
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the bad ecosystem in npm is one of the main reason he made deno, that's what deno/std is for. While not stable yet, they are working to address this very issue Zig is looking great but also, solving a different problem

Excuse me, but what's this "bad ecosystem in npm" you're talking about? Every single JS lib, pipeline tool, framework is on npmjs.com (react, webpack, bootstrap, expressjs, and 100'000s others). It's the ecosystem that every contender would love to be. And the lack of a "stdlib" is exactly how and why npm started over ten years ago, via the community-driven CommonJs initiative (JSCI, connect/express.js, the package.j…

> It's the ecosystem that every contender would love to be.

Trying to clarify - do you mean other JS ecosystems? Outside of JS, NPM is usually used as what not to do, not as an aspiration.

Re: Deno 1.10 Release Notes

#104
post #8

Still not tempted by Deno to be honest. All the problem that currently exist in Node are being ported to Deno straight up. The built-in apis provided by Node.JS are almost non-existent... hence most of them are buggy and quiet tedious to use , it's why the community has created thousands of packages to resolve those issues. Here I don't see how Deno is solving this , all the APIS seems again so barebone.. instead of…

Still not tempted by NodeJS or Deno

Re: Deno 1.10 Release Notes

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am trying to expand my horizons from only node to other frameworks. I've seen so much hype around Deno so I looked into it the other day and I feel the same as you. It doesn't seem different enough from Node from a user standpoint. I also agree that the package system seems messy. For right now I'm going to steer clear and get out django and rails.

Try Elixir and thank me later.

How’s the lack of static types treating you? Honest question as someone looking at Gleam.

Re: Deno 1.10 Release Notes

#107
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I would have wanted to see a decent stdlib to be a goal for 1.0. I recently wrote a 10 line script that had to work with date arithmetic *, and while importing URLs is pretty cool, it still was the same shit of spending 80% of the time it took to write the code browsing and evaluating multiple third party date libraries to find one good enough for my use case. So in practice the only improvement Deno had over No…

I have yet to find a datetime library in any language that was adequate for all purposes I've needed. That's not a particularly damning example in my opinion. I've had to write very weird datetime code in JS, Python, and Ruby. I don't even want to imagine the horrible things you could find in some other languages.

In Java, Joda-Time was a third party library for ages. It was the dominant date-time lib for enterprise development. Then, it was standardised and added to the stdlib: java.time (JSR-310). The Joda-Time project lead, Stephen Colebourne, ran the standardisation process. It was well received by most, even the breaking API changes that SC was adamant were flaws in the original Joda-Time API. I can vouch for it: Both Joda-Time and the java.time libs are excellent. (In my job, I regularly need to perform complex date-time transformations, including time zones.)

I have also used Howard Hinnant's C++ date-time lib: https://github.com/HowardHinnant/date It is also very good. (He was the guy behind move semantics in C++ 11.)

In Python, the stdlib has a function to get UTC now, that does not include UTC timezone... so it weirdly and surprisingly acts like local time zone! There is endless shit-posting about it. I feel bad for Guido van Rossum et al. To be fair, the original Java date-time lib was horrible, so Joda-Time was created. And JDBC (Java database) dates are still horrible.

Re: Deno 1.10 Release Notes

#108

I like the ideas behind Deno, but I'm wondering if testing should be so included in the standard library, unless it is extremely flexible. Each team will have different problems when it comes to scaling, running tests in parallel - sometimes on the same machine, sometimes on multiple machines, e2e tests vs unit-tests, etc. This looks like a problem you solve in a library, not something to add in the core.

Legit concern but it's also possible they evolve a great general solution where everyone looks back and says "oh yeah that's what that api ought to be like"

Re: Deno 1.10 Release Notes

#109
post #88
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

fetch() is a notable web feature missing from Node.js core

add WebSockets to that list.

Like I said, is aligning more and more:

* https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/19393

* https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/19308

Web APIs is not something that Deno is doing and Node isn’t. It is more something that Deno has done a few of which Node hasn’t yet.

Re: Deno 1.10 Release Notes

#110
post #8

Still not tempted by Deno to be honest. All the problem that currently exist in Node are being ported to Deno straight up. The built-in apis provided by Node.JS are almost non-existent... hence most of them are buggy and quiet tedious to use , it's why the community has created thousands of packages to resolve those issues. Here I don't see how Deno is solving this , all the APIS seems again so barebone.. instead of…

I use NodeJS daily, but I do agree some fundamental APIs are missing. For example, calling remote URLS is critical for most apps, yet Node only offers the "http" and "https" packages (and why different packages!). It should at least have "fetch" support and require installing the "node-fetch" dependency.

I'm glad Deno is here trying to push the ecosystem forward, at least with Typescript, and hopefully Node will learn from them.

Post reply on HN