101–110 of 127 posts
I still don't understand the true goal of Deno. It started as "better node.js", with better security and modern tooling. Better security was not achieved imo, it's not flexible enough but painful enough that you want to allow everything straight away. The module system suffers the same issues as of npm, and since everything is loaded from the same domain its hard to tell what is official or not. They have a builtin s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like to get paid for my work. Most people do. There is nothing disgraceful about that. I don't see any difference between deno as a company and your SAAS bernard.app.
My SaaS is not an open source project nor a language runtime. How would you feel if Go, Elixir or Rust (just to name a few) were run by a company that depends on their success, so try to push aggressively new features and mindshare, often with disastrous result? Are Go, Elixir or Rust developers working for free? There is a difference between getting paid to work on open source, and structuring an open source company…
I love the direction deno is going with a batteries included standard library for server side JS. It makes so much sense to me to consider it for simple stuff so I could have backend and frontend code all in modern JS or typescript. Things like internal tools, dev tools, etc. that just need to pop some HTML, rendered markdown, collect a few forms, run some business processes, etc. No need to wrestle the node ecosyste…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a lock-in strategy. There is zero reason for a language runtime to be opinionated about the database. All the good programming advice will tell you such a coupling is a bad idea. What if you want to move parts of your application to a different language in the future, do you need to redo the entire database? That is just nuts! Database providers, cloud application platforms should be agnostic of the language the…
> What if you want to move parts of your application to a different language in the future, do you need to redo the entire database? That is just nuts! How often does that happen?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Deno feels a fire under their ass. The JS ecosystem has not really embraced Deno in terms of tooling, libraries or frameworks and the serverless ecosystem has not embraced Deno as a runtime (aws/gcp/azure functions), so they're iterating rapidly to see if they can get something to really stick. And then there's Bun. I love Deno for system scripting but the friction with the rest of the JS ecosystem has preven…
Their main issue IMO is that they are not really bringing anything major to the table in exchange for the very high cost of breaking compatibility with nodejs. If you are going to create a competing ecosystem it has to be somewhat revolutionary for the cost of investing/migrating to a whole new ecosystem to be worth it. I like Typescript quite well, but if I'm told I'm going to throw away my nodejs/ts code base and s…
This is why my money is on Bun, just like a safe bet in Carbon. Both are designed to be drop-in-capable in large codebases where the bean counters aren't going to budget a total rewrite that redelivers the same functionality.
I still don't understand the true goal of Deno. It started as "better node.js", with better security and modern tooling. Better security was not achieved imo, it's not flexible enough but painful enough that you want to allow everything straight away. The module system suffers the same issues as of npm, and since everything is loaded from the same domain its hard to tell what is official or not. They have a builtin s…
Deno is really useful on edge computing like serverless lambda functions in things like NextJS/Vercel or Supabase and such
Building a KV store into the language is kind of nuts. I love how it abstracts away the local SQLite and deployed FoundationDB behind one interface. Testing would be super easy, as there is no question of "do I spin up an entire db instance or mock the db interface?" as SQLite is relatively lightweight and the burden for keeping both cases consistent falls to the language instead. That being said, was wondering wheth…
It's not really built into the language though? It's just a function on the global Deno object, similar to how there's a global 'document' object in browsers (and that's not 'built into the language' either).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My SaaS is not an open source project nor a language runtime. How would you feel if Go, Elixir or Rust (just to name a few) were run by a company that depends on their success, so try to push aggressively new features and mindshare, often with disastrous result? Are Go, Elixir or Rust developers working for free? There is a difference between getting paid to work on open source, and structuring an open source company…
A bit of a tangent, but I looks at your link to Bernard. Aren't there a lot of broken link-checking services out there already? Curious to learn what your USP is, and/or your approach to competing in a saturated market.
I've seen that happen countless times, and no service I've tested was able to monitor for that use case satisfactorily and/or at that price point.
In other words, my goal is to create a service to uphold Berners-Lee's "cool URIs don't change" mantra.
Building a KV store into the language is kind of nuts. I love how it abstracts away the local SQLite and deployed FoundationDB behind one interface. Testing would be super easy, as there is no question of "do I spin up an entire db instance or mock the db interface?" as SQLite is relatively lightweight and the burden for keeping both cases consistent falls to the language instead. That being said, was wondering wheth…
Isn't it part of the standard library rather than the language? Anyways, Erlang has mnesia [0] and ETS [1]. ETS is practically a KV store, which can also be persisted to disk.
[0] https://www.erlang.org/doc/man/mnesia.html [1] https://www.erlang.org/doc/man/ets.html