21–30 of 100 posts
Yeah, no.
I wonder if more people just assume that to be true, heh. I kind of was expecting it, weirdly enough.
Hint: "node" is "edon" backwards. Not sure if that name is taken for something Javascripty ... * goes to check * yeah, I found [1] which seems to be 4 years old, tagline "Run browser JS in the terminal".
The security model is a big one for me. If they could extend the permissions system to work for individual dependencies, they could solve one of the biggest security issues facing developers right now. Especially if policies could also be applied to node packages. Are there any plans to move in this direction? It seems like if you can do it for the full app, you should hypothetically have the capability to make it li…
It attempts to do what you're essentially describing. It was built by the MetaMask team, where supply chain attacks are an obviously huge risk.
I've spent some time trying to get it working in an app, but haven't been able to get it all the way working. It's still pretty beta and not well documented.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Too easy to get started" is just gate keeping.
On one hand, JavaScript being easy makes programming accessible. On the other hand, the state of programming is terrible and getting worse. So you can't say if it's bad or not.
> ‘Deno’ (like ‘Node’ but backwards) Yeah, no. I wonder if more people just assume that to be true, heh. I kind of was expecting it, weirdly enough. Hint: "node" is "edon" backwards. Not sure if that name is taken for something Javascripty ... * goes to check * yeah, I found [1] which seems to be 4 years old, tagline "Run browser JS in the terminal". [1] https://github.com/dbkaplun/edon
The security model is a big one for me. If they could extend the permissions system to work for individual dependencies, they could solve one of the biggest security issues facing developers right now. Especially if policies could also be applied to node packages. Are there any plans to move in this direction? It seems like if you can do it for the full app, you should hypothetically have the capability to make it li…
You should check out Lavamoat: https://github.com/LavaMoat/LavaMoat It attempts to do what you're essentially describing. It was built by the MetaMask team, where supply chain attacks are an obviously huge risk. I've spent some time trying to get it working in an app, but haven't been able to get it all the way working. It's still pretty beta and not well documented.
Deno's approach seems most promising so far since it's really ideal to have this built in to the core runtime, but it's not really very useful yet as implemented and I don't know whether taking it further is a priority for them.
> Node.js is too easy to get started. This means that the pool of available programmers is not the highest quality. Runtimes like Go or Deno are still havens for the ‘connoisseur’ programmer. wat (Deno seems worth checking out though!)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On one hand, JavaScript being easy makes programming accessible. On the other hand, the state of programming is terrible and getting worse. So you can't say if it's bad or not.
> On the other hand, the state of programming is terrible and getting worse. What does this mean? It's an order of magnitude easier to build an app/service/whatever today than it was a decade ago. Having to maintain separate code paths for IE because it doesn't support many of the APIs and CSS features you need was "terrible"; by comparison, engineering today is heavenly.
> ‘Deno’ (like ‘Node’ but backwards) Yeah, no. I wonder if more people just assume that to be true, heh. I kind of was expecting it, weirdly enough. Hint: "node" is "edon" backwards. Not sure if that name is taken for something Javascripty ... * goes to check * yeah, I found [1] which seems to be 4 years old, tagline "Run browser JS in the terminal". [1] https://github.com/dbkaplun/edon
Deno is No|de swapped. So no, not backwards. But... how would one call it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Or perhaps there are non-obvious blockers that make it too hard? To me, it seems like you'd need a new language.
Why is that? I may be missing something, but they're already enforcing permissions at runtime, which seems like the hard part to me. It would 'just' need to be integrated with the call stack so you know which dependency(ies) want system/network access.
> ‘Deno’ (like ‘Node’ but backwards) Yeah, no. I wonder if more people just assume that to be true, heh. I kind of was expecting it, weirdly enough. Hint: "node" is "edon" backwards. Not sure if that name is taken for something Javascripty ... * goes to check * yeah, I found [1] which seems to be 4 years old, tagline "Run browser JS in the terminal". [1] https://github.com/dbkaplun/edon
Deno is No|de swapped. So no, not backwards. But... how would one call it?