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

Deno vs. Bun vs. Node.js: A feature comparison

dev.hexagon.56k.guru

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–56 of 56 posts

Re: Deno vs. Bun vs. Node.js: A feature comparison

#51

Post by DanielHB »

ComputerGuru wrote: post #10

So where does all this backend activity leave frontend tooling? It seems the divide only grows despite the upstream attempts by the ES committee to bridge the gap.

Adding the bundler to the runtime is the way to go in my opinion, the code you write in your scripts/server should run exactly the same as in the browser and not require separate configuration (besides bundling-specific things like how to split your modules for lazy loading).

It is crazy that every web framework these days is trying to re-solve bundling for browsers

Re: Deno vs. Bun vs. Node.js: A feature comparison

#52

Post by DanielHB »

ryapric wrote: post #36
rcarmo wrote: post #35

For me, the key thing that is missing is dgram (UDP) support. Makes bun unusable for a lot of IoT scenarios.

Why would you want to use JavaScript in IoT scenarios?

I do it at my company, to talk to microcontrollers. We have a few CLI tools we use for testing that run on NodeJS. Our web-wrapped maintenance desktop application also sends UDP packages directly to microcontrollers but there we do it a bit differently. We have a proxy that forwards websocket messages as UDP packets running in the native code of our desktop application.

Would be really nice if we could send UDP messages directly from the browser, but it is understandable from security perspective.

Re: Deno vs. Bun vs. Node.js: A feature comparison

#53

Post by Hexagon56k »

report-to-trees wrote: post #48
Hexagon56k wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about something like " (Built in)", " (Native Ecosystem)", " (Third party), " " as a fix which avoids loads of text?

In my opinion that would be much more helpful than what was there before, it still gives preference to built in tools above all other criteria but you at least avoid the false impression that tools provided by the ecosystem don't exist.

Done!

Re: Deno vs. Bun vs. Node.js: A feature comparison

#54

Post by Hexagon56k »

afavour wrote: post #13

There’s an important column missing in the table: ownership. Both Bun and Deno are made by companies with heavy VC investment. Node is not. Don’t want to state the obvious but those VCs want to see a return on their investment and that makes me very hesitant to invest in Bun or Deno, especially at this early stage. Don’t know if it’s coincidence or if the competition has lit a fire under the Node project but it’s rec…

Fixed!

Re: Deno vs. Bun vs. Node.js: A feature comparison

#55

Post by rcme »

report-to-trees wrote: post #3

I wasn't expecting a deep and thorough comparison just from the headline... but the feature list and comparison text here is worse than I thought it would be, bordering on useless. "Built in" means nothing because the value prop of node compared to the other two is the ecosystem and maturity. Do you care if your linting tool is built in if it's buggy and regularly releases breaking changes? "Secure by default" in par…

"Secure by default" means something. It means Deno is a more appropriate choice for running untrusted code compared to node.

Re: Deno vs. Bun vs. Node.js: A feature comparison

#56

Post by Rapzid »

birkskyum wrote: post #16
afavour wrote: post #13

There’s an important column missing in the table: ownership. Both Bun and Deno are made by companies with heavy VC investment. Node is not. Don’t want to state the obvious but those VCs want to see a return on their investment and that makes me very hesitant to invest in Bun or Deno, especially at this early stage. Don’t know if it’s coincidence or if the competition has lit a fire under the Node project but it’s rec…

That is true. Both deno and bun runtimes are released under MIT license, and might potentially outlive the companies behind them.

There are a relative handful of people willing and able to work on these projects. Lots of OSS software just gets abandoned when their corporate sponsors stop developing them; like Chakra Core and a bunch of Mozilla projects.
Post reply on HN