5 ms·
Sad such a reasonable question is downvoted, lol. I agree with the sentiment. It's expected any development would want to have the highest reach, which means No
by endisneigh 3y ago
Sad such a reasonable question is downvoted, lol. I agree with the sentiment. It's expected any development would want to have the highest reach, which means Node. If Deno supports node features, and node does not support deno clearly the logical conclusion is that features will be node-first, with deno expected to support it anyway. Thus leading to the question of why even bother with Deno?
Deno does have some benefits, such as security model and speed, but those are not things that couldn't be added to Node. Once Node adds the security model why use Deno?
- forty 3y agoNodejs is the de facto platform and ecosystem to write JS backend, and it seemed to me a bit weird that one would want to compete with it without being compatible with it which meant throwing away the very large ecosystem and existing code bases with no good reasons if you wanted to migrate. So congrats to them to have made it now, Deno can still compete on speed or tooling for example. Good Deno ideas will indeed probably make their way to Nodejs (or already did), and it's great, it makes Deno already useful for everyone even if it ends up not being used that much. About the security model: can someone explain why it's a good idea to have isolation at the interpreter level rather than relying on OS features? (or VMs). I cannot see why a security team would want an isolation system that's different for a specific platform.
- paulddraper 3y ago> can someone explain why it's a good idea to have isolation at the interpreter level rather than relying on OS features? (or VMs). Those technologies are platform-specific and difficult to use. For example, provide the command line for running a Node.js program in Linux without file system access. In deno, it's deno run main.ts Or, to enable fs access: deno run --allow-read --allow-write main.ts --- That said, I agree that I'd rather rely on containers, VMs, etc.
- mati365 3y agoReinvent of unevil / pledge
- forty 3y agoSomething along the lines of > docker run -it --rm -v "$PWD":/app -w /app node:18 node main.js It's a tad longer but it's more flexible too ;)
- paulddraper 3y agoOf course, now you have to boot and run an entire VM on your MacBook, just to run that one Node.js program.
- forty 3y agoAh yes, I always forgot some people don't use Linux as their OS to develop. That always seems weird to me because then they have to launch VMs each time they want to simulate their target OS :D But I do see your point :)
- pjmlp 3y agoBeing a developer!== Linux.
- forty 3y agoInteresting theory ;)
- pjmlp 3y agoEasily proven by happy consumers on Apple, Microsoft, Sony and Nintendo devices. Or the millions of daily passengers in transport mechanisms powered by high integrity operating systems.
- forty 3y agoI'm kidding of course. But in the specific context of this thread which was Nodejs backend development, I'd still maintain that not using Linux to develop is suboptimal.
- paulddraper 3y ago> Thus leading to the question of why even bother with Deno? 1. Native support for TypeScript. 2. Better built-in APIs. 3. Security model. 4. Easy package management. Node.js is closing the gap. E.g. top-level await, fetch() API, Permissions. I believe Node.js will follow Deno and implement more and more features. Sort of a npm/yarn situation. It's cool to see what Deno does, but I don't think you will be left out by sticking with Node.js.