3 ms·
The interesting thing is, you can run the js you build in the spreadsheet, independent of the spreadsheet environment. Unfortunately the project looks pretty d
by raidicy 7y ago
The interesting thing is, you can run the js you build in the spreadsheet, independent of the spreadsheet environment.
Unfortunately the project looks pretty dead. And further one of the bullet points is "is lightweight: ~2000 lines of source code (excluding libraries)" but looking into app.js it's something like 23k loc. It uses react but it looks to be pre-JSX. And because it's all in one giant file it feels too overwhelming for me to want to learn/extend it. He says it's compatible with IE 11. And maybe that's why it's structured that way, but I don't know. Despite it all the idea is really cool.
- chrispsn 7y agoNot dead, just evolving! I hope to bring some of the insights from doing the k version into the free JS version. But even then, the formula language is unlikely to be raw JS - maybe jq, or a k subset. JS, as a moving target, is just too hard to parse in a small package. Mesh's backend sits in one giant file because that's how we can write it in a Mesh sheet. But unfortunately the JS parsing library is huge and forms the bulk of the code. Happily, the k version is currently ~100 lines excluding tests. If JSX were used, would the code need to be compiled? Mesh used to have a compilation step but it just added complexity (config files, build process, increased download size). Keep it simple! React.createElement is fine.
- raidicy 7y agoThanks for the reply. I hope my post didn't sound snarky. I have very limited time and was just disappointed at the size of the parsing code. Ultimately, I really think the idea is great! I've never seen k, nor any array langs before but would definitely checkout the K mesh version. No idea about the JSX though.