You don't need a build step • Hacker News Board

Re: You don't need a build step

#41

Post by techpression » Thu, Mar 02, 2023, 4:40 PM UTC

codemonkey-zeta wrote: post #27

So Deno is relying on native ESM imports in production code? Isn't that exactly what Vite _doesn't_ do, because of poor performance? When you run the vite dev server it uses ESM, but when you build it uses rollup, because serving ESM is slow and with larger apps the client browser is going to make a bazillion requests. Wouldn't you rather traverse the dependency graph one time and bundle your code into modules so tha…

I think this is actually because esbuild doesn’t support everything needed in their production bundle (well controlled/grouped bundles) while it’s excellent for dev where there’s no such need.

I can’t remember where I read it, I think it’s in the official docs.

Re: You don't need a build step

#42

Post by pictur » Thu, Mar 02, 2023, 4:42 PM UTC

groestl wrote: post #19

[flagged]

I think that the absence of a compilation phase does not prevent the establishment of infrastructure for e2e testing. If you can only be sure that the application is running when the build is successful, then there are probably other big problems there.

Re: You don't need a build step

#43

Post by brundolf » Thu, Mar 02, 2023, 4:44 PM UTC

franciscop wrote: post #6

So basically Deno has its own bundler that lets you not have a local build step and it gets bundled dynamically per-route as requested by users, right? This is very different from industry standards and possibly has many new concerns from devs, none of which are addressed in the article since it's treating the system as a perfect solution, which makes sense since it's a marketing page ("content marketing"). If it was…

It sounds like (it is a little vague) there is no bundling at all, the only thing Deno does magically at request time is transpiling TypeScript/JSX to browser-compatible JS. Beyond that I think the idea is it relies on native ES module imports (and import-maps), both of which are browser standards

Re: You don't need a build step

#44

Post by whstl » Thu, Mar 02, 2023, 4:45 PM UTC

groestl wrote: post #19

[flagged]

No, they don't have to.

Deno supports Typescript. And Typescript supports Typechecking without a build process.

Linters, tests and other tools can also be run without a build process.

Re: You don't need a build step

#45

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Mar 02, 2023, 4:48 PM UTC

ChicagoDave wrote: post #5

Pretty sure we were building code to validate it and unit test it before releasing it. This article is strictly about JavaScript. What about all the server-side rendering frameworks? Huge assumption that everything is built one way.

[deleted]

Re: You don't need a build step

#46

Post by redox99 » Thu, Mar 02, 2023, 4:49 PM UTC

I'm not sure why so many are interested in not having a build step. You'll still want to have a step that runs typescript to check for errors, a linter, maybe your tests and other stuff.

Or do people just want to YOLO it and let it crash in prod?

Re: You don't need a build step

#47

Post by haolez » Thu, Mar 02, 2023, 4:51 PM UTC

Maybe they could add a new transpiled language as well, like Civet[0] or ReScript[1]. Not every project needs to be a C#/.NET clone in TypeScript :)

[0] https://civet.dev/

[1] https://rescript-lang.org/

Re: You don't need a build step

#48

Post by irrational » Thu, Mar 02, 2023, 4:52 PM UTC

I hate hate hate that modern web development requires a build system. No build system would probably get me to convert to Deno.

Re: You don't need a build step

#49

Post by whstl » Thu, Mar 02, 2023, 4:52 PM UTC

jesse__ wrote: post #40

Sounds to me like we've round-tripped back to PHP, circa 2009. Bout time!

There are good things and bad things about PHP. This is one of the good things.

Re: You don't need a build step

#50

Post by mattgreenrocks » Thu, Mar 02, 2023, 4:54 PM UTC

jesse__ wrote: post #40

Sounds to me like we've round-tripped back to PHP, circa 2009. Bout time!

That's the vibe I got from browsing the Fresh documentation. However, I don't see it as a bad thing! Concepts feel like they fit together much more nicely than what I've seen in a lot of web tools.

As someone who is a bit of an outsider to webdev, it looks like enough power to make most webapps I'd want to make. I think the only question in my mind is what the benefits/drawbacks of Deno+Fresh vs something like SvelteKit.