5 ms·

Use browserify — http://browserify.org http://browserify.org Compared to require.js browserify has the following benefits: * CommonJS module format which is l

Use browserify — http://browserify.org http://browserify.org Compared to require.js browserify has the following benefits: * CommonJS module format which is less verbose than AMD * it uses node_modules/ dir to load dependencies from so * ... you can use npm to install dependencies * ... and if you use Node.js then that facilitates code sharing between your client and server

streptomycin 13y ago
None of that addresses the complaints raised in the article.
williamcotton 13y ago
The downside of this approach is all of the bootstrapping for running and developing your project is now a new environment on the server side. Don't forget that all of this tech carries a lot of mass and now you're having to maintain a number of different tools! If this is an open source project, you just went from: python -m SimpleHTTPServer || open index.html To: npm install && grunt build && grunt run ... And now as a person wanting to work on your code I have a whole slew of new tools to learn! It's not always as cut and dry of a decision...
- willurd 13y ago
  Not that this invalidates what you said, but NPM and Grunt (and just enough Node.js to use them) are required learning for JavaScript developers nowadays IMO.
  - willurd 13y ago
    Does whoever downvoted me care to explain why or offer another opinion?
  - andypants 13y ago
    I didn't downvote you, but I use nodejs and I've never needed to use grunt. I don't think grunt is as pervasive as npm in the world of node.js.
    - willurd 13y ago
      Maybe that's where the confusion was. I was talking about browser development. Thanks.
    - hexasquid 13y ago
      Grunt is just generally a helpful little task runner and good for automating many things in general web development - running tests, concatenation / minification, linting, HTML / CSS / JS preprocessing and so on, if that floats your boat. It really is worth giving it a go.
      - andypants 13y ago
        Well, makefiles have worked fine for me so far.
        jdlshore 13y ago
        You might like Jake, then. It's a Node.js version of Rake (which is a ruby version of make).
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]

streptomycin 13y ago

None of that addresses the complaints raised in the article.

williamcotton 13y ago

The downside of this approach is all of the bootstrapping for running and developing your project is now a new environment on the server side. Don't forget that all of this tech carries a lot of mass and now you're having to maintain a number of different tools! If this is an open source project, you just went from: python -m SimpleHTTPServer || open index.html To: npm install && grunt build && grunt run ... And now as a person wanting to work on your code I have a whole slew of new tools to learn! It's not always as cut and dry of a decision...

willurd 13y ago
Not that this invalidates what you said, but NPM and Grunt (and just enough Node.js to use them) are required learning for JavaScript developers nowadays IMO.
- willurd 13y ago
  Does whoever downvoted me care to explain why or offer another opinion?
- andypants 13y ago
  I didn't downvote you, but I use nodejs and I've never needed to use grunt. I don't think grunt is as pervasive as npm in the world of node.js.
  - willurd 13y ago
    Maybe that's where the confusion was. I was talking about browser development. Thanks.
  - hexasquid 13y ago
    Grunt is just generally a helpful little task runner and good for automating many things in general web development - running tests, concatenation / minification, linting, HTML / CSS / JS preprocessing and so on, if that floats your boat. It really is worth giving it a go.
    - andypants 13y ago
      Well, makefiles have worked fine for me so far.
      - jdlshore 13y ago
        You might like Jake, then. It's a Node.js version of Rake (which is a ruby version of make).
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]