3 ms·
Sure, and you can do something similar with C and obtain a ~10kb executable, or even less if you put some effort. Or write that in Java and need a complex setup
by dguaraglia 6y ago
Sure, and you can do something similar with C and obtain a ~10kb executable, or even less if you put some effort. Or write that in Java and need a complex setup including the JRE and a bunch of packages to support it.
The point is that this makes deploying a Deno application simpler. Binary size is kind of the wrong metric to worry about.
- svnpenn 6y agoMy point is, what is even the point of using Deno? If its for static typing... well Go has that. So what is the benefit?
- Soremwar 6y agoWhat's even the point of using Go? If it's for static typing Rust has that So what's the benefit? Same can be said about any language really, it's personal preference
- throw_m239339 6y ago> So what is the benefit? A better type system(covariance, dependent types) than Go's and generics, a richer ecosystem, deploying the same codebase on the server and in the client...
- fareesh 6y agoGuessing here - is there any value from a team / engineering point of view to having shared code for custom classes / data structures between client and server? Here I assume client to be mean browser
- ben509 6y agoIf you wrote a browser client in Javascript / Typescript, then it makes sense to write a backend in it as well since it's easy to share code and data between them. Now you can also write CLI tools that are trivial to deploy and can also share code with everything else. This is the same motivation behind other languages that do the reverse; compile to JS / WASM.