> irresponsible for the future of software development Not true. This is highly interchangeable tooling - it can have whatever dependencies you want, because t

> irresponsible for the future of software development Not true. This is highly interchangeable tooling - it can have whatever dependencies you want, because there's no "dependency explosion" that happens with libraries. LSP is a standardized protocol - you can swap it out with anything you like. Moreover, people rarely build interactive tools on top of other interactive tools. Now, if this were a library with a bunch of dependencies, that would be a whole different matter - then any program or library that used this would get all of the transitive dependencies - but, it's not. Go and reimplement this tool yourself. RIIR, make a statically-linked 500kb executable with no perceptual execution time, and eat their lunch, because your tool is a drop-in replacement. Is a Node dependency a bad idea for this tool? Arguably yes. Is it "irresponsible for the future of software development"? That statement is so false that I suspect it's being used to try to emotionally manipulate readers instead of making a coherent argument. Also...are you aware that Bash already tab-completion, even if it's not automatic? I'm beginning to wonder if this is a very subtle April Fool's post...