7 ms·
> Extending web programming beyond the browser is not a novel idea. Indeed, we have done that with moderate success in our “Node.js” project. But over a decade
by kostarelo 6y ago
> Extending web programming beyond the browser is not a novel idea. Indeed, we have done that with moderate success in our “Node.js” project. But over a decade later, we find server-side JavaScript hopelessly fragmented, deeply tied to bad infrastructure, and irrevocably ruled by committees without the incentive to innovate. As the browser platform moves forward at a rapid pace, server-side JavaScript has stagnated.
wow lots of bold statements there. And another one for the usual "JavaScript is fragmented, let's create another tool to fix 'em all.".
- bayindirh 6y agoRelevant XKCD: https://xkcd.com/927/ https://xkcd.com/927/ Can't we have a chuckle? No? OK.
- user-the-name 6y agoLiterally everyone has seen this. There's no chuckle.
- kybernetikos 6y agoIt doesn't really apply here. When you create something in a field that already has other entrants, that's a completely different thing from trying to unify all the other entrants, and ending up just creating another also-ran. There's nothing wrong with identifying an area that you think you can contribute something innovative to and building something opinionated for it.
- yulaow 6y agoIt feels like the old IO.js vs node.js. I hope this time too the two ecosystems get merged, but this time it feels much harder to happen
- sbarre 6y agoWasn't that more of an ideological than technical split? Deno is more of an ecosystem reboot than a fork, I would think.
- yulaow 6y agoYeah, with the use of "it feels" this time I was literally trying to express the feeling of "oh no, another big divergence in js" like it felt at the time (even if it was indeed ad "ideological split" as you say, I remember clearly at the time a lot of blog posts about how it meant that in the long run we COULD have different ways of doing things / calling apis / build frameworks / etc... )
- sbarre 6y agoFair enough.. I agree that we'll have to see where this goes, and hopefully a technical effort doesn't get overshadowed by an ideological one.. Because you know this blog post and announcement will draw some strong reactions from entrenched interests.
- steveklabnik 6y agoYou cannot always cleanly differentiate these two. You could argue that "Node vs io.js" was an "ideological" split because they wanted different governance, but one big reason they wanted different governance is to make different technical choices (for example, track upstream V8 more closely), so you could also claim this was a "technical" split too.
- sbarre 6y agoYeah, no kidding.. shots fired... As someone who uses Node but doesn't closely follow the steering/proposals side of things, I can't say I had this impression of that process.. Is Node really that bad compared to how JS/ES is innovated on in the browser?
- beaconstudios 6y agoNode is only just now getting around to adding promise based APIs to the core. Any time you interact with the Node core APIs you have to drop back to using callbacks - that's at least one area where Node is behind the times.
- pharmakom 6y agoOr use the ubiquitous NPM to install a promise orientated package... I don’t see this as a big problem honestly.
- beaconstudios 6y agoI'm not sure what you think could qualify Node as not keeping with the times, if not implementing the modern standard for async interfaces isn't it.
- ianwalter 6y agoI agree with you that it would be nice if more of core supported promises, but I think there are probably plenty of examples of them keeping up with the times or charging ahead as well. Top-level await and optional chaining are a couple features that come to mind.
- beaconstudios 6y agotrue, the language-evaluation side is keeping up. But isn't that just a case of integrating newer versions of v8? NodeJS doesn't implement its own JS engine.
- airstrike 6y agoI hear you, but I'll also give them some credit—you can't create anything worthwhile without a clear vision which basically requires an opinionated sense of purpose.
- TechBro8615 6y agoRyan Dahl (author of the announcement post) is the creator of Node.js, so I think he's got a right to say these things! Also see "10 things I regret about Node" [0] [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3BM9TB-8yA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3BM9TB-8yA
- cphoover 6y agoRyan Dahl left the leadership of the Node.js pretty early in its development. A lot of people can be considered "the creator" of Node.js to be fair.
- nrmitchi 6y agoWhile I'm not going to argue the history of if/when he left the project, my understanding is that it's fairly agreed upon that he is the creator of Node.js. If you google "node js creator", he's an embedded answer (not a search result). The first line on Wikipedia in the nodejs history section is "Node.js was written initially by Ryan Dahl in 2009". You can make whatever point you want, but maybe try to do it without rewriting history, or changing the agreed-upon definition of "creator".
- notriddle 6y ago> If you google "node js creator", he's an embedded answer (not a search result). Embedded answers are worse than useless. https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=who%20invented%20hands https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=who%20invented%20hands
- burlesona 6y agoRight behind the giant understatement of calling Node a “modest success.”
- myko 6y agoA modest understatement if you will