3 ms·
This is really nice, and useful, I would love to see more like this, but wonder if there isn't some room to join forces between the best JS libraries out there
by eranation 14y ago
This is really nice, and useful, I would love to see more like this, but wonder if there isn't some room to join forces between the best JS libraries out there and try to create a common utility belt compilation (e.g. work to avoid conflicts, and namespace collisions, joint testing, shared convention and merge efforts on similar things) e.g. I would love to have the JavaScript equivalent of Apache commons / Guava (previously Google collections).
I mean, if there is one thing I do like about Java (when I can't use Scala for some reason), is those utility belt libraries (and JodaTime of course). Whenever I hit a wall trying to do something in plain old Java, Guava / Apache Commons seems to read my mind and have a data structure, or a utility to the rescue.
Do you think it's a good thing to strive for? Do you see it happening?
- jongleberry 14y agoif you look at the code, it's based on TJ Holowaychuk's component: https://github.com/component/component https://github.com/component/component. there's i believe 600 "utilities" you can pick and choose from: https://github.com/component/component/wiki/Components https://github.com/component/component/wiki/Components. since it's CommonJS, you won't have any namespace collisions or conflicts. i don't know how this relates to Apache commons, JodaTime, or Guava however, but i just wanted to add a little context.