5 ms·

What they don't say in this panegyric to node is that.. 1. The language (js) is absolutely horrific. 2. node is single threaded and non-blocking/async in I/O fo

What they don't say in this panegyric to node is that.. 1. The language (js) is absolutely horrific. 2. node is single threaded and non-blocking/async in I/O for some operations but when blocking requires libuv and gymnastics. 3. It moves too fast for stability. I've encountered huge memory leaks with node at various versions that are terrible to debug. 4. It is designed to the lowest possible specification for development: web developers. 5. js package mgmt and build tools are a running joke.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
andrewstuart2 9y ago
> It is designed to the lowest possible specification for development: web developers. This is not a productive comment.
- fundabulousrIII 9y ago
  Sorry to offend but if you are seriously considering js on the backend then it becomes a valid concern. I don't want a meta-tag junkie with the ability to craft massive markup via whatever interface and IDE deciding what systems behaviors should be. That does _seem_ to be where we are going these days.
woah 9y ago
There are languages that I like better than JS. However, JS servers power trillions of dollars of business. People who grasp for reasons to hate on JS are a little like people who get into flame wars about video game franchise rivalries. It's symptomatic of deep unmet emotional needs in that person's life.
- fundabulousrIII 9y ago
  herp-derp.
- lmm 9y ago
  > People who grasp for reasons to hate on JS are a little like people who get into flame wars about video game franchise rivalries. It's symptomatic of deep unmet emotional needs in that person's life. To the extent that that's true, I'd say it's equally true of "here is this list of companies that use my preferred tools" articles like this one.
- DonbunEf7 9y ago
  Oh, of course, people dislike JS because they're unhappy inside. It can't be that JS is a lame language.
- tomc1985 9y ago
  > It's symptomatic of deep unmet emotional needs in that person's life. Pretty sure pronouncements like that are the real indicator of unmet emotional needs. The way this community needles dissenting opinions needs to change. If you don't like the HN flavor of things, the resulting swarm of nitpicking, self-righteous commenters blots out the sun.
  - jessaustin 9y ago
    Is that really what you're seeing on this thread? Whinging about how horrible node.js and how horrible it is that we're all forced by the government to use it, is the conventional wisdom on HN. A few people disagreeing with CW is not "this community needles dissenting opinions".
  - always_good 9y ago
    Eh, scroll through the comments in every submission that mentions JavaScript (like this one) and you'll see a bunch of people lambasting anyone that uses JavaScript. "Ugh, why would anyone use it on the server? Idiots!" "Lol web developers only know one language. Sad!" As if anybody that chooses a different set of trade-offs is incompetent, not just comfortable with a different set of trade-offs.
    - collyw 9y ago
      Maybe they say that because they have used better languages, rather than unmet emotional needs.
      - Can_Not 9y ago
        Languages that are a minimum of 1 year of maturity behind nodejs for the specific use-cases that nodejs is typically used for.
- bo1024 9y ago
  I don't care much what websites use on their back end servers. As long as it keeps my data secure. But my interactions with JS on the front end are almost always unpleasant, so it's hard to be happy seeing JS succeed and proliferate in general.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- peterashford 9y ago
  That's really very arogant. If people don't like JS, there's something wrong with them emotionally? Jesus wept! I happen to think there's nothing wrong with being annoyed that in the biggest marketplace in modern IT - the Web - we have ONE option for programming solutions. One! As engineers, I don't think it's unreasonable that we should be able to choose the best tool for the job, not the only tool for the job. That doesn't mean that JS is useless (or that I have emotional problems) but that other languages might be better suited to various tasks. That seems to a me a plain and uncontroversial statement that doesn't require positing mental defects to explain people who disagree with you.
ericmcer 9y ago
Why would you ever use the word 'panegyric' instead of article? Maybe you like to purposefully complicate things so that you can maintain your elitism? This might be related to your dislike of JS.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

andrewstuart2 9y ago

> It is designed to the lowest possible specification for development: web developers. This is not a productive comment.

fundabulousrIII 9y ago
Sorry to offend but if you are seriously considering js on the backend then it becomes a valid concern. I don't want a meta-tag junkie with the ability to craft massive markup via whatever interface and IDE deciding what systems behaviors should be. That does _seem_ to be where we are going these days.

woah 9y ago

There are languages that I like better than JS. However, JS servers power trillions of dollars of business. People who grasp for reasons to hate on JS are a little like people who get into flame wars about video game franchise rivalries. It's symptomatic of deep unmet emotional needs in that person's life.

fundabulousrIII 9y ago
herp-derp.
lmm 9y ago
> People who grasp for reasons to hate on JS are a little like people who get into flame wars about video game franchise rivalries. It's symptomatic of deep unmet emotional needs in that person's life. To the extent that that's true, I'd say it's equally true of "here is this list of companies that use my preferred tools" articles like this one.
DonbunEf7 9y ago
Oh, of course, people dislike JS because they're unhappy inside. It can't be that JS is a lame language.
tomc1985 9y ago
> It's symptomatic of deep unmet emotional needs in that person's life. Pretty sure pronouncements like that are the real indicator of unmet emotional needs. The way this community needles dissenting opinions needs to change. If you don't like the HN flavor of things, the resulting swarm of nitpicking, self-righteous commenters blots out the sun.
- jessaustin 9y ago
  Is that really what you're seeing on this thread? Whinging about how horrible node.js and how horrible it is that we're all forced by the government to use it, is the conventional wisdom on HN. A few people disagreeing with CW is not "this community needles dissenting opinions".
- always_good 9y ago
  Eh, scroll through the comments in every submission that mentions JavaScript (like this one) and you'll see a bunch of people lambasting anyone that uses JavaScript. "Ugh, why would anyone use it on the server? Idiots!" "Lol web developers only know one language. Sad!" As if anybody that chooses a different set of trade-offs is incompetent, not just comfortable with a different set of trade-offs.
  - collyw 9y ago
    Maybe they say that because they have used better languages, rather than unmet emotional needs.
    - Can_Not 9y ago
      Languages that are a minimum of 1 year of maturity behind nodejs for the specific use-cases that nodejs is typically used for.
bo1024 9y ago
I don't care much what websites use on their back end servers. As long as it keeps my data secure. But my interactions with JS on the front end are almost always unpleasant, so it's hard to be happy seeing JS succeed and proliferate in general.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
peterashford 9y ago
That's really very arogant. If people don't like JS, there's something wrong with them emotionally? Jesus wept! I happen to think there's nothing wrong with being annoyed that in the biggest marketplace in modern IT - the Web - we have ONE option for programming solutions. One! As engineers, I don't think it's unreasonable that we should be able to choose the best tool for the job, not the only tool for the job. That doesn't mean that JS is useless (or that I have emotional problems) but that other languages might be better suited to various tasks. That seems to a me a plain and uncontroversial statement that doesn't require positing mental defects to explain people who disagree with you.

ericmcer 9y ago

Why would you ever use the word 'panegyric' instead of article? Maybe you like to purposefully complicate things so that you can maintain your elitism? This might be related to your dislike of JS.