5 ms·

I think the problems articulated in this article will make Deno attractive to many JavaScript developers. The standard Deno library has everything needed for bu

I think the problems articulated in this article will make Deno attractive to many JavaScript developers. The standard Deno library has everything needed for building server-side dynamic websites. But I think what will speed adoption of Deno is something that has been little-commented on: the runtime is a single-executable. This massively simplifies deployment. Contrast that with Node, Python, Ruby and the way they spew out dozen, often 100s, of tiny script files all over the place. Simple, uncomplicated deployment solutions (particularly for self-hosting) simply don't exist with many interpreted languages. Whatever you think of Deno, their decision to create a single executable runtime will make it attractive to many developers.

mirekrusin 6y ago
Technically speaking you can have single "deno" npm with all those apis and you'd be in pretty much the same place, dependency-wise, no?
_pdp_ 6y ago
Deno makes not sense to me outside of hobby projects, lambda functions and other small components. Large projects with thousands of lines of code will be difficult to support with this paradigm. The security model is also not great. I applaud the effort, I think it is great, but command line flags for security work only for small project files. For any large project you need something that is granular and per module/function. If you start going down that rabbit hole you will end up with some kind of configuration file no different than package.json.