14 ms·

Io.js 1.0.0

634 points by elisee 12y ago

elisee 12y ago
(Huge) changelog from the latest stable Node version v0.10.35, including all changes from unstable v0.11: https://github.com/iojs/io.js/blob/v1.x/CHANGELOG.md https://github.com/iojs/io.js/blob/v1.x/CHANGELOG.md Also of interest, the state of ES6 in io.js: https://github.com/seegno/io.js/wiki/The-state-of-ES6-on-io.js https://github.com/seegno/io.js/wiki/The-state-of-ES6-on-io..... Highlights: 'let', generators, promises, template literals, symbols are all enabled by default. EDIT: just realized this wiki page has been updated and integrated into the website at https://iojs.org/es6.html https://iojs.org/es6.html
nubela 12y ago
How does a 1.0.0 translate to beta-stability build?
- elisee 12y ago
  As I understand it, the io.js devs think Node.js should have switched to 1.x ("stable") a long time ago. But from their perspective, this is io.js's first release with their own build infrastructure and they made a lot of aggressive changes (updated V8 dependency, etc.), so they're calling their own release beta-quality. Makes sense?
  - stephenr 12y ago
    It doesn't make sense to release beta quality software as "v1.0.0" without any reference to being a beta in the version itself. Either use a 0.x version or use a -beta -identifier if the api is fixed but stability is not guaranteed
    - diggan 12y ago
      It does say "Version 1.0.1 (Beta stability)", what more are you requesting?
      - stephenr 12y ago
        The "(Beta stability)" is just text on that webpage. The version is just 1.0.1. By any sane logic any release after 1.x should be considered stable UNLESS otherwise stated. This is why we have the concepts of things like "dev", "alpha", "beta", "rc" (release candidate) identifiers for versions. Nowhere does io.js use any of these terms except in that homepage. So now, anyone relying on any other source to get the product either as source or in a binary package has no way to know if it's considered "stable" yet. So what I want - basic common fucking sense is what I want. Nobody in their right mind would release software marked as version "1.0.0" with full knowledge and even the barest of acknowledgement, that it's only beta quality. The explanation I've seen so far is that the people behind the fork are sick of NodeJS never reaching 1.0 despite being used in production. Sure thats a good reason to make it 1.0 - because a heap of cool kids have jumped on the bandwagon and bet their business on it, it must be stable right? Oh wait, but then they admit that it's only beta quality. So they want it to be versioned as if it's appropriate to use it in production, but they know its actually not.
- secoif 12y ago
  Node is moving to semantic versioning: http://semver.org/ http://semver.org/ In this scheme, version number is not an indicator of stability.
  - stephenr 12y ago
    Semver specifically stipulates that pre-1.0.0 is for unstable work. > Major version zero (0.y.z) is for initial development. Anything may change at any time. The public API should not be considered stable. It also allows for identifiers/metadata after the version eg 1.0.0-alpha or similar. It also specifically says: > Version 1.0.0 defines the public API.
dmamills 12y ago
hard to argue with that changeset
ykl 12y ago
What is a spork, as contrasted with a development fork?
- Gys 12y ago
  I think it is the same ? Some people think a spork sounds less offensive (more friendly) then a fork ? Also as a utensil (which these are both).
- elisee 12y ago
  It's a playful way to say they don't really want to fork the Node.js ecosystem. io.js will evolve alongside Node.js and the core team is open to merging back with Node.js if possible.
dsissitka 12y ago
Version 1.0.0 (Beta stability) The hell? Seems it's intentional: https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/251#issuecomment-69417750 https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/251#issuecomment-694177...
- k__ 12y ago
  Doesn't 1.0.0 simply mean, API stability?
  - reitanqild 12y ago
    An explanation about the downvotes would be appreciated. Thanks.
    - k__ 12y ago
      hu?
      - reitanqild 12y ago
        I know it is late but here is the explanation: It was not my post and I care less about being downvoted and more about the problem that some people seems to prefer downvoting to explainating. Downvoting, -in my opinion, is for things like redditism, clear breach of site guidelines etc. It is not for being uninformed (within reasonable limits) and certianly not for asking reasonable questions.
- ChiperSoft 12y ago
  They're sticking the strict semver with no tags, and explicitly wanted to abandon the 0.x version numbers, so the TC decided to do 1.0.0 as the first release but make it clear that it's not production ready.
Killswitch 12y ago
Congratulations guys!
aasarava 12y ago
Tip to anyone rolling out a library and wanting others to start using it: It'd be helpful if the home page or the FAQ explained what io.js actually does and why a developer might want to explore it further. "Bringing ES6" is only helpful if you know what ES6 is and have already decided it's something you need. Likewise, the FAQ simply says io.js is compatible with Node.js and npm, but that doesn't give you much to work with. Can someone who knows the project explain the benefits?
- Killswitch 12y ago
  Basically anything you can do in Node.js you can do in Io.js. It's nothing that really breaks backwards compatibility. The benefits of Io.js over Node.js is that it'll have a faster release cycle bringing in newer versions of V8 JavaScript Engine, allowing you to use newer features of that in your code. In Node.js to use ES6 you would have to use the --harmony flag to enable them because the version of V8 that is used is so old. Whereas in Io.js anything V8 deems stable is available in Io.js without having to use the --harmony flag.
- tach4n 12y ago
  You're right that the page linked in OP needs improvement. The phrase to focus on is this: > io.js is an npm compatible platform originally based on node.js It's not a library, it's a platform that's based on node.js. It's more or less a fork of node or "spork" as they call it. The github repo is a bit more clear: https://github.com/iojs/io.js https://github.com/iojs/io.js The main point seems to be that it's run on an open governance model: https://github.com/iojs/io.js/blob/v1.x/GOVERNANCE.md https://github.com/iojs/io.js/blob/v1.x/GOVERNANCE.md
  - pcl 12y ago
    If I were them, I'd say something like: "io.js is an api-compatible alternative to the node.js runtime, including support for the npm ecosystem, that aims to release faster than the node.js release cycle and move according to a community-driven open governance model." Given the tremendous volume of packages released to npm, the current one-liner initially just doesn't convey much information. In context of the comments here, it all parses perfectly, but I was one of many who needed this context to understand the (apparent) goals of the project.
quaunaut 12y ago
...Okay, normally I roll my eyes at people asking "What does this do" but Christ this is ridiculous. From the FAQ: > What is io.js? > io.js is a JavaScript platform that is compatable with Node.js & npm. What does that even mean? Edit: Thanks for those answering. I started figuring out what it was, but sometimes folks really need to learn that "A correct definition" is not the same as "a useful definition". However, if it's as cool as described, definitely might give it a shot. Edit2: Is this expected to be as stable as Node.js consistently? And how solid is the upgrade path- is it going to be a pain upgrading between versions the way Node used to be, or is there a smoother upgrade process? I guess what I'm wondering is, do I get any benefit from using this right now, or would it be smart to still wait for whatever version they consider release quality?
- monkey_slap 12y ago
  I still cannot figure out what this actually is besides Javascript
  - gelatocar 12y ago
    It's basically a fork of nodejs
  - secoif 12y ago
    Google's v8 is the JavaScript. io.js provides APIs for performing disk and network io, using v8.
    - rinz 12y ago
      Node has IO methods as well...
  - CmonDev 12y ago
    It's an implementation of the Reactor Pattern with some package management capability. Not a platform. Not a framework. Not an engine. Just a script.
    - 12y ago
untog 12y ago
As someone who tries as hard as they can to avoid project politics and the like: is this the new Node.js? By which I mean I know it isn't the Node project, but where is most of the mindshare these days? Is io.js a small offshoot or has it taken most of the Node devs with it? Or is it the same code just with a more aggressive release schedule? Also, when do we go back to one executable already?
- james33 12y ago
  I think it is probably too soon to answer that question since this is the first release available for devs to start playing around with.
- shadowmint 12y ago
  If we're lucky this will turn into the 'unstable branch' with new features and things which is periodically folded back into the 'stable' node.js platform. ...but if node wont play ball, it'll become 'the new node', yes. (there's a lot of backstory to this, which you can read about here: http://blog.izs.me/post/104685388058/io-js http://blog.izs.me/post/104685388058/io-js)
  - btown 12y ago
    > "npm" does not stand for Node Package Manager. It is officially an abbreviation for “npm is not an acronym”. We do enjoy novel pun-making though. I couldn't resist: https://github.com/npm/npm-expansions/pull/245/files https://github.com/npm/npm-expansions/pull/245/files
silverwind 12y ago
OP: sorry to nitpick, but the proper capitalization is 'io.js'.
- elisee 12y ago
  HN auto-capitalizes the first letter when submitting, sadly. EDIT: Turns out it doesn't do it a second time if I edit, so, fixed :) EDIT2: Aaaand it reverted itself to Io.js, somehow.
  - silverwind 12y ago
    Sounds like some sort of title-fixing job they run, sigh.
- ulisesrmzroche 12y ago
  Actually, it's both io.js or Io.js. The one that got canned was IO.js.
  - ryanatkn 12y ago
    From https://github.com/iojs/io.js https://github.com/iojs/io.js > Is it io.js or IO.js or iojs or IOjs or iOjS? > The official name is io.js, which should never be capitalized, especially not at the start of a sentence, unless it is being displayed in a location that is customarily all-caps (such as the title of man pages.)
acdanger 12y ago
"This package will install io.js v1.0.0 and npm v2.1.18 into /usr/local/. The binary /usr/local/bin/iojs will also be symlinked as /usr/local/bin/node." Why the symlinking as node?
- Killswitch 12y ago
  Because Io.js is a Node.js replacement, but most of the time you're probably going to instinctively type `node script.js` and not `iojs script.js` so the symlink is just a helper.
  - solomone 12y ago
    It's for bin scripts such as NPM which refer to the executable directly. See here: https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/249 https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/249
- adregan 12y ago
  Homebrew asked me to overwrite my node symlink with the iojs symlink. I decided to link iojs to iojs on my own. I hope I'm not spinning myself into some technical debt here, but for now, I'd like to maintain both.
  - ChiChou 12y ago
    Some npm modules require specific version of node. If iojs overwrites `node` you may see node-gyp use algernative fallback build, which causes installation failure. At least now, the better way is to keep symlink to node as node. Use iojs when needed.
scope 12y ago
how would one go about deploying (say on Heroku) an iojs app?
- silverwind 12y ago
  Heroku has pretty good node support, but I'd doubt they support replacing the binary yet, so you'd have to wait for Heroku to support that. For manual deployment, the single iojs binary and your project folder should suffice, along with a way to start/restart your app automatically.
  - tlrobinson 12y ago
    Heroku supports arbitrary "buildpacks", it should be easy to create one for iojs.
  - btown 12y ago
    Heroku's way ahead of you... https://github.com/heroku/heroku-buildpack-nodejs/blob/a77cd257d1052d7bcffd5b5b261ee9794703daac/bin/compile#L36 https://github.com/heroku/heroku-buildpack-nodejs/blob/a77cd... EDIT: To clarify, though I haven't tried it myself, it looks like you can just specify `"engine.iojs": "1.0.0"` in your package.json, and Heroku will install the entire io.js system for you.
    - j_0 12y ago
      Came across this just before opening this thread, you are correct https://twitter.com/hunterloftis/status/555234067520565249 https://twitter.com/hunterloftis/status/555234067520565249
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- hunterloftis 12y ago
  Heroku node maintainer here. No official docs yet (it's like an hour old already! :) but it works about the way you might guess: use engines.iojs instead of engines.node in your package.json. (screencast: https://twitter.com/HunterLoftis/status/555234067520565249 https://twitter.com/HunterLoftis/status/555234067520565249) We're also excited to see node hit a 1.0 and merge in new V8, ES6 features, etc. I'm especially excited about Cluster's round-robin load balancing which has been a compelling reason to use 'unstable 0.11' for a while.
simlevesque 12y ago
I have no issue with this fork but why oh why did they drop semantic versioning ? Do they want us to waste our time reading every single changelog ?
- elisee 12y ago
  They didn't drop semantic versioning (assuming you're talking about http://semver.org/ http://semver.org/), they're switching to it (see https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/28 https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/28). Node.js uses MINOR even = stable, odd = unstable (which is not semver) and is still in 0.x even though it's been used by giants in production all over the world for a couple years.
- politician 12y ago
  Honest question, do you have good luck with semantic versioning? I find it's pretty hit or miss on whether an X.Y.2 patch breaks functionality in the previous X.Y.1 build.
nickfargo 12y ago
ls -l /usr/local/bin/node lrwxr-xr-x 1 502 staff 4 Jan 13 20:10 /usr/local/bin/node -> iojs Is this necessary?
- elisee 12y ago
  Yes, lots of packages depend on "the JavaScript executable" being called node. Discussion: https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/43 https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/43
- tree_of_item 12y ago
  Yes, I've watched some of the io.js minutes on YouTube and they basically reached a consensus that this was definitely necessary. They want to be a drop in replacement for Node.js.
AbeEstrada 12y ago
In case you want to install it with `brew` https://github.com/smockle/homebrew-iojs https://github.com/smockle/homebrew-iojs
_greim_ 12y ago
I suspect there will be a split in the npm ecosystem now, not so much along node/iojs lines but along es5/es6 lines. There's already been lots of discussion about whether module builders should publish es6 code, or should everything be transpiled down to es5 code in order to keep the ecosystem unified (the unspoken caveat being, around es5). I think es5 is a dinosaur as of today, so I say go ahead and publish es6 code, and if you want to be nice to es5 people then add a prepublish transpiler that makes something like this possible: // es6 people can do var foo = require('foo'); // es5 people can do var foo = require('foo/es5');
- wycats 12y ago
  Important to note: because JavaScript itself is always backwards-compatible (1JS), any code that runs on Node will run on iojs, but not necessarily vice versa. That means there need not be a split in the ecosystem: people who want maximal coverage can target ES5, while people who want the latest features can target ES6. Unlike the browser, however, where people can't control their runtimes, I suspect there will be much less tolerance for sticking with older versions of JavaScript. Indeed, the pain and suffering people have felt with IE6 will likely make everyone much more willing to reject an unnecessary lowest-common-denominator approach on the server. We're liberated on the server. Let's act like it.
  - emgee3 12y ago
    > Important to note: because JavaScript itself is always backwards-compatible (1JS), any code that runs on Node will run on iojs, but not necessarily vice versa. Though I'd imagine this will not hold true with addons, seeing as there are vastly different versions of the V8 engine.
  - _greim_ 12y ago
    > We're liberated on the server. I'm liberated on the server in my own app, but not necessarily if I'm publishing something for everyone to use. In that case I'm either forced to feature-detect my way along, or target certain engines. The reason I think the latter will happen is devs to whom node was an escape-hatch from client-side hell will loathe the idea of going back. E.g. [1] [1] https://twitter.com/brianleroux/status/554753200503271424 https://twitter.com/brianleroux/status/554753200503271424
nsamuell 12y ago
And so it begins
_almosnow 12y ago
From their changelog, it seems that addons changed, does anyone know if current npm packages will still be usable? Also, good to see bnoorhuids in there.
chadpaulson 12y ago
Congratulations to the io.js team! I look forward to future releases. Specifically, no longer having to use --harmony_arrow_functions.
- domenicd 12y ago
  Ugh, please don't use that. The semantics of --harmony_arrow_functions are totally different from real arrow functions. Your code will break horribly.
  - jkrems 12y ago
    ...not to mention the habit of triggering assertion errors when combined with let-scopes.
malkia 12y ago
Without reading, just looking I thought it would be about Steve Dekorte's Io Language targeting javascript.
- DennisP 12y ago
  Same here, got my hopes up. Kinda wish they hadn't overloaded that name.
thomasfoster96 12y ago
From what I can understand, io.js is now node with the latest version of v8 and ES6(+ES7) features enabled by default (as opposed to behind a flag). I'm wondering, what technical reasons are there for Node not using the latest version of v8 for each release? I can understand Node keeping some new ES6/7 features behind a flag (just as some are behind a flag in Chrome).
- ivank 12y ago
  V8 updates bring incompatible changes to the V8 API, and many node extensions written in C++ need to be updated. Hence the decision to stick with an old V8, even though it's no longer maintained by Google. There is a compatibility layer to assist with making these modules work across different V8 versions: https://github.com/rvagg/nan https://github.com/rvagg/nan
bsimpson 12y ago
I understand that Node was lagging behind on merging newer versions of V8, but holy hell: how did they have so many patches to the standard library that weren't properly released?
hayd 12y ago
Well, that escalated quickly.
waitingkuo 12y ago
I can unalias my `alias node=node --harmony` now!!
maga 12y ago
Since there are features in Io that are neither in the current version nor planned for the future versions of Node, I guess Io.js should be explicitly specified as an engine in the package.json file of Io-specific modules. Tracking those modules will be a good metric of how well Io is received by the community.
jorangreef 12y ago
Congratulations to the team who made this possible. Thanks for your hard work. Looking forward to switching binaries.
tuananh 12y ago
it seems it uninstall `node` when install itself.
- stepstep 12y ago
  It just overwrites the node symlink. > "This package will install io.js v1.0.0 and npm v2.1.18 into /usr/local/. The binary /usr/local/bin/iojs will also be symlinked as /usr/local/bin/node."
  - dustinls 12y ago
    The windows install for this took the liberty of removing my original nodejs install, removed the binary and batch files from the program files\nodejs directory, even though I opted to install iojs to its own folder. Nodejs shortcuts are removed from start menu, and path variables were removed as well. Go to reinstall nodejs, and that install says a later version is already installed and cancels the install without giving me an option to install anyway.
  - tuananh 12y ago
    i was talking about windows installer.
Exuma 12y ago
Sorry but (Beta stability) looks like it says "bestiality." I would recommend changing that...
duncanawoods 12y ago
In their words, io.js is "A spork of Node.js with an open governance model". Hmm. Lets hope the spork gets spooned so that no projects get knifed. If not then I guess we have to hope for a knork so we don't get stuck with a couple of chopsticks. Glossary Forking : Creating a fork to intentionally diverge from main-line development. Spooning : Merging a fork back into the main line of a project Sporking : Creating a fork that you would really like to become the next main-line version but you kinda have to prove its awesome first (sporks are pretty awesome) Knifing : Action killing a project, abandon hope :( Knorking : A fork replaces the original project which dies off i.e. a fork knifes the original Chopsticking : Two forks vie for popularity splitting the community and becoming lone chopsticks. Chopsticks need to work together to make stuff happen!
- Fishrock123 12y ago
  For posterity to anyone who still reads this, the spork thing is mostly my fault. And it sort of caught on. I do website and irc stuff for io.js and I had trouble describing what the project was in relation to node.js. So I called it a spork, because "sporks are friendlier". Whatever that means. Aside from being friendly. Proof is somewhere in the io.js irc logs back near when the project sporked. http://logs.libuv.org/io.js http://logs.libuv.org/io.js
- benihana 12y ago
  groan Don't get me wrong, thanks for the information. But seriously. It's like when you come up with a whimsical naming scheme for your home network devices and you get trapped in that naming scheme and have to come up with more and more obscure Lithuanian folk demons that fit into your conventions and it becomes a parody of itself and you're not sure if you're serious or joking anymore.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - jscheel 12y ago
    I named my new external drive "Rama". Not sure how far I can take that, though.
mdemo 12y ago
io.js version management https://github.com/demohi/ivm https://github.com/demohi/ivm
evantahler 12y ago
Congratulations on the release! Keep moving JS-server-stuff forward!
hmans 12y ago
Anyone fork it yet?
sambeau 12y ago
Am I alone in being bemused and amused by this: Version 1.0.1 (Beta stability) Surely the main point of a 1.0 release is "stability" and to no longer be "beta"?
- stephenr 12y ago
  To me it just follows on the ridiculousness of the Node community in general. A tool at version 0.10 and everyone screams about how stable it is and can't wait to bet their business on it. A bunch of people are unhappy and fork the project, and make the initial version 1.0, but make a point of saying (despite not using a related version number/identifier) that it's beta. Realistically it sounds like both projects should be at v0.9.x.
  - namuol 12y ago
    This seems like a step away from "ridiculous" to me. Declaring something as 1.0 means that any 1.X releases are going to be backwards-compatible with the 1.0 spec. This is objectively different than versioning something 0.X, which implies that the baseline spec is not finalized. Calling something "Beta", however, just means that a feature-complete major version is still being actively developed (i.e. new minor features and bugfixes). In other words "1.0 Beta" just means "Stable spec, active codebase".
    - stephenr 12y ago
      So why is it called "1.0.1" (and now 1.0.1 on the homepage) and not "1.0.0-beta" ?
      - sturadnidge 12y ago
        The 1.0.0 release was called 1.0.0 - there has been a patch release since. Pretty much any software I can think of lists the latest release on the homepage rather than linking to a static version, but you're right it's a little confusing that specifying a version in the querystring doesn't actually appear to link directly to that version. EDIT: confusing if the intention of the iojs team was to have the querystring actually mean something... they may well not have that intention, in which case meh :)
misterdai 12y ago
Here's the most recent minutes (2014-12-19) for the Node.js Advisory Board where they discussed Io.js (while considering their 0.12 release). https://github.com/joyent/nodejs-advisory-board/blob/master/meetings/2014-12-19/minutes.md#node-012 https://github.com/joyent/nodejs-advisory-board/blob/master/...
pascalo 12y ago
Is there a ubuntu ppa for this already?
Touche 12y ago
Can this be installed with Node side-by-side or does it take over the `node` name?
- AdamCraven 12y ago
  It takes over the `node` name via symlinks. But you can have a working REPL side by side by overwriting with the prior node one again. Node isn't uninstalled.
- ericclemmons 12y ago
  nvm is being updated to support installing both project-specific node and io.js libraries.
- iamdeedubs 12y ago
  It gets symlinked to node and npm
grandalf 12y ago
Any advice on whether it's better to use ES6 or Coffeescript?
- antihero 12y ago
  I think that ES6 is going to reduce the need for things like CoffeeScript, or at least a lot of what people use (arrow functions, for instance).
- robinricard 12y ago
  First of all they're not the same thing. Coffeescript transpiles to JS (ES3 or 4 if I remember well) and ES6 is a new standard (not finished yet). Maybe one day coffee may compile to ES6 (but that's not likely since that would break support with older browsers). As said before, ES6 may reduce the need of transpiled languages but won't replace them. From my point of view, ES6 will never replace ClojureScript nor TypeScript (ES6 doesn't bring the power of a LISP like clojure or the type system of TS). As for coffee, many people may still prefer its more lightweight syntax that ES6 does not intend to replace either. Let's say that ES6 will provide a better runtime that may make transpiled languages less useful. Yes, ES6 does arrow functions and classes but it also provides many more cool stuff that the transpiled languages may never support such as generators if they intend to keep backward compat to older browsers. If you are in this case you should bet on ES6. If you don't care and are happy with what's included in coffee, use coffee ! You can always compile it to JS and continue your project with ES6 ! To sum up, transpiled languages are not dead and are still way more flexible than vanilla JS (as they don't depend on a big specification such as the ES specs) but ES6 does improve the runtime, and one day transpiled languages may use this new runtime.
  - grandalf 12y ago
    Thanks -- that meshes with my impression so far. Is it smart/reasonable to use the es6 shim today?
  - kylemathews 12y ago
    Support for generators has been merged into Coffeescript master — https://github.com/jashkenas/coffeescript/pull/3240 https://github.com/jashkenas/coffeescript/pull/3240
roelvanhintum 12y ago
Now that browsers are starting to be compatible, lets make js on the server incompatible...
debacle 12y ago
This is cool and I am excited. I have been playing with Node for a while but the pace towards stable was so glacial I couldn't take the software seriously.
drderidder 12y ago
Node got forked because it got corped. When a corporation sinks their hooks into an active open source project, it's only a matter of time. Mysql, Maria, Hudson, Jenkins... same story. io.js is the way forward, and congrats to the core team.
- TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
  Plenty of corporations have successfully managed open-source projects.
  - vlunkr 12y ago
    Yes. And I wouldn't compare Joyent with Oracle.
- munificent 12y ago
  > When a corporation sinks their hooks into an active open source project, it's only a matter of time. An ironic statement given that one of the main motivations for io.js is to upgrade to the new awesome versions of V8 with all of its great new features. V8, of course, has always been "corped": it was created and is maintained almost entirely by Google.
antouank 12y ago
Nodeup podcast 81 about io.js, with Mikeal Rogers, Isaac Schlueter and Chris Dickinson. http://nodeup.com/eightyone http://nodeup.com/eightyone
gobengo 12y ago
$> diff <(node --v8-options | grep harmony) <(./iojs --v8-options | grep harmony) 1,6c1,18 < --harmony_typeof (enable harmony semantics for typeof) < --harmony_scoping (enable harmony block scoping) < --harmony_modules (enable harmony modules (implies block scoping)) < --harmony_proxies (enable harmony proxies) < --harmony_collections (enable harmony collections (sets, maps, and weak maps)) < --harmony (enable all harmony features (except typeof)) --- > --es_staging (enable all completed harmony features) > --harmony (enable all completed harmony features) > --harmony_shipping (enable all shipped harmony fetaures) > --harmony_modules (enable "harmony modules (implies block scoping)" (in progress)) > --harmony_arrays (enable "harmony array methods" (in progress)) > --harmony_array_includes (enable "harmony Array.prototype.includes" (in progress)) > --harmony_regexps (enable "harmony regular expression extensions" (in progress)) > --harmony_arrow_functions (enable "harmony arrow functions" (in progress)) > --harmony_proxies (enable "harmony proxies" (in progress)) > --harmony_sloppy (enable "harmony features in sloppy mode" (in progress)) > --harmony_unicode (enable "harmony unicode escapes" (in progress)) > --harmony_tostring (enable "harmony toString") > --harmony_numeric_literals (enable "harmony numeric literals") > --harmony_strings (enable "harmony string methods") > --harmony_scoping (enable "harmony block scoping") > --harmony_classes (enable "harmony classes (implies block scoping & object literal extension)") > --harmony_object_literals (enable "harmony object literal extensions") > --harmony_templates (enable "harmony template literals")

634 points by elisee 12y ago

(Huge) changelog from the latest stable Node version v0.10.35, including all changes from unstable v0.11: https://github.com/iojs/io.js/blob/v1.x/CHANGELOG.md https://github.com/iojs/io.js/blob/v1.x/CHANGELOG.md Also of interest, the state of ES6 in io.js: https://github.com/seegno/io.js/wiki/The-state-of-ES6-on-io.js https://github.com/seegno/io.js/wiki/The-state-of-ES6-on-io..... Highlights: 'let', generators, promises, template literals, symbols are all enabled by default. EDIT: just realized this wiki page has been updated and integrated into the website at https://iojs.org/es6.html https://iojs.org/es6.html

nubela 12y ago

How does a 1.0.0 translate to beta-stability build?

elisee 12y ago
As I understand it, the io.js devs think Node.js should have switched to 1.x ("stable") a long time ago. But from their perspective, this is io.js's first release with their own build infrastructure and they made a lot of aggressive changes (updated V8 dependency, etc.), so they're calling their own release beta-quality. Makes sense?
- stephenr 12y ago
  It doesn't make sense to release beta quality software as "v1.0.0" without any reference to being a beta in the version itself. Either use a 0.x version or use a -beta -identifier if the api is fixed but stability is not guaranteed
  - diggan 12y ago
    It does say "Version 1.0.1 (Beta stability)", what more are you requesting?
    - stephenr 12y ago
      The "(Beta stability)" is just text on that webpage. The version is just 1.0.1. By any sane logic any release after 1.x should be considered stable UNLESS otherwise stated. This is why we have the concepts of things like "dev", "alpha", "beta", "rc" (release candidate) identifiers for versions. Nowhere does io.js use any of these terms except in that homepage. So now, anyone relying on any other source to get the product either as source or in a binary package has no way to know if it's considered "stable" yet. So what I want - basic common fucking sense is what I want. Nobody in their right mind would release software marked as version "1.0.0" with full knowledge and even the barest of acknowledgement, that it's only beta quality. The explanation I've seen so far is that the people behind the fork are sick of NodeJS never reaching 1.0 despite being used in production. Sure thats a good reason to make it 1.0 - because a heap of cool kids have jumped on the bandwagon and bet their business on it, it must be stable right? Oh wait, but then they admit that it's only beta quality. So they want it to be versioned as if it's appropriate to use it in production, but they know its actually not.
secoif 12y ago
Node is moving to semantic versioning: http://semver.org/ http://semver.org/ In this scheme, version number is not an indicator of stability.
- stephenr 12y ago
  Semver specifically stipulates that pre-1.0.0 is for unstable work. > Major version zero (0.y.z) is for initial development. Anything may change at any time. The public API should not be considered stable. It also allows for identifiers/metadata after the version eg 1.0.0-alpha or similar. It also specifically says: > Version 1.0.0 defines the public API.

dmamills 12y ago

hard to argue with that changeset

ykl 12y ago

What is a spork, as contrasted with a development fork?

Gys 12y ago
I think it is the same ? Some people think a spork sounds less offensive (more friendly) then a fork ? Also as a utensil (which these are both).
elisee 12y ago
It's a playful way to say they don't really want to fork the Node.js ecosystem. io.js will evolve alongside Node.js and the core team is open to merging back with Node.js if possible.

dsissitka 12y ago

Version 1.0.0 (Beta stability) The hell? Seems it's intentional: https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/251#issuecomment-69417750 https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/251#issuecomment-694177...

k__ 12y ago
Doesn't 1.0.0 simply mean, API stability?
- reitanqild 12y ago
  An explanation about the downvotes would be appreciated. Thanks.
  - k__ 12y ago
    hu?
    - reitanqild 12y ago
      I know it is late but here is the explanation: It was not my post and I care less about being downvoted and more about the problem that some people seems to prefer downvoting to explainating. Downvoting, -in my opinion, is for things like redditism, clear breach of site guidelines etc. It is not for being uninformed (within reasonable limits) and certianly not for asking reasonable questions.
ChiperSoft 12y ago
They're sticking the strict semver with no tags, and explicitly wanted to abandon the 0.x version numbers, so the TC decided to do 1.0.0 as the first release but make it clear that it's not production ready.

Killswitch 12y ago

Congratulations guys!

aasarava 12y ago

Tip to anyone rolling out a library and wanting others to start using it: It'd be helpful if the home page or the FAQ explained what io.js actually does and why a developer might want to explore it further. "Bringing ES6" is only helpful if you know what ES6 is and have already decided it's something you need. Likewise, the FAQ simply says io.js is compatible with Node.js and npm, but that doesn't give you much to work with. Can someone who knows the project explain the benefits?

Killswitch 12y ago
Basically anything you can do in Node.js you can do in Io.js. It's nothing that really breaks backwards compatibility. The benefits of Io.js over Node.js is that it'll have a faster release cycle bringing in newer versions of V8 JavaScript Engine, allowing you to use newer features of that in your code. In Node.js to use ES6 you would have to use the --harmony flag to enable them because the version of V8 that is used is so old. Whereas in Io.js anything V8 deems stable is available in Io.js without having to use the --harmony flag.
tach4n 12y ago
You're right that the page linked in OP needs improvement. The phrase to focus on is this: > io.js is an npm compatible platform originally based on node.js It's not a library, it's a platform that's based on node.js. It's more or less a fork of node or "spork" as they call it. The github repo is a bit more clear: https://github.com/iojs/io.js https://github.com/iojs/io.js The main point seems to be that it's run on an open governance model: https://github.com/iojs/io.js/blob/v1.x/GOVERNANCE.md https://github.com/iojs/io.js/blob/v1.x/GOVERNANCE.md
- pcl 12y ago
  If I were them, I'd say something like: "io.js is an api-compatible alternative to the node.js runtime, including support for the npm ecosystem, that aims to release faster than the node.js release cycle and move according to a community-driven open governance model." Given the tremendous volume of packages released to npm, the current one-liner initially just doesn't convey much information. In context of the comments here, it all parses perfectly, but I was one of many who needed this context to understand the (apparent) goals of the project.

quaunaut 12y ago

...Okay, normally I roll my eyes at people asking "What does this do" but Christ this is ridiculous. From the FAQ: > What is io.js? > io.js is a JavaScript platform that is compatable with Node.js & npm. What does that even mean? Edit: Thanks for those answering. I started figuring out what it was, but sometimes folks really need to learn that "A correct definition" is not the same as "a useful definition". However, if it's as cool as described, definitely might give it a shot. Edit2: Is this expected to be as stable as Node.js consistently? And how solid is the upgrade path- is it going to be a pain upgrading between versions the way Node used to be, or is there a smoother upgrade process? I guess what I'm wondering is, do I get any benefit from using this right now, or would it be smart to still wait for whatever version they consider release quality?

monkey_slap 12y ago
I still cannot figure out what this actually is besides Javascript
- gelatocar 12y ago
  It's basically a fork of nodejs
- secoif 12y ago
  Google's v8 is the JavaScript. io.js provides APIs for performing disk and network io, using v8.
  - rinz 12y ago
    Node has IO methods as well...
- CmonDev 12y ago
  It's an implementation of the Reactor Pattern with some package management capability. Not a platform. Not a framework. Not an engine. Just a script.
  - 12y ago

untog 12y ago

As someone who tries as hard as they can to avoid project politics and the like: is this the new Node.js? By which I mean I know it isn't the Node project, but where is most of the mindshare these days? Is io.js a small offshoot or has it taken most of the Node devs with it? Or is it the same code just with a more aggressive release schedule? Also, when do we go back to one executable already?

james33 12y ago
I think it is probably too soon to answer that question since this is the first release available for devs to start playing around with.
shadowmint 12y ago
If we're lucky this will turn into the 'unstable branch' with new features and things which is periodically folded back into the 'stable' node.js platform. ...but if node wont play ball, it'll become 'the new node', yes. (there's a lot of backstory to this, which you can read about here: http://blog.izs.me/post/104685388058/io-js http://blog.izs.me/post/104685388058/io-js)
- btown 12y ago
  > "npm" does not stand for Node Package Manager. It is officially an abbreviation for “npm is not an acronym”. We do enjoy novel pun-making though. I couldn't resist: https://github.com/npm/npm-expansions/pull/245/files https://github.com/npm/npm-expansions/pull/245/files

silverwind 12y ago

OP: sorry to nitpick, but the proper capitalization is 'io.js'.

elisee 12y ago
HN auto-capitalizes the first letter when submitting, sadly. EDIT: Turns out it doesn't do it a second time if I edit, so, fixed :) EDIT2: Aaaand it reverted itself to Io.js, somehow.
- silverwind 12y ago
  Sounds like some sort of title-fixing job they run, sigh.
ulisesrmzroche 12y ago
Actually, it's both io.js or Io.js. The one that got canned was IO.js.
- ryanatkn 12y ago
  From https://github.com/iojs/io.js https://github.com/iojs/io.js > Is it io.js or IO.js or iojs or IOjs or iOjS? > The official name is io.js, which should never be capitalized, especially not at the start of a sentence, unless it is being displayed in a location that is customarily all-caps (such as the title of man pages.)

acdanger 12y ago

"This package will install io.js v1.0.0 and npm v2.1.18 into /usr/local/. The binary /usr/local/bin/iojs will also be symlinked as /usr/local/bin/node." Why the symlinking as node?

Killswitch 12y ago
Because Io.js is a Node.js replacement, but most of the time you're probably going to instinctively type `node script.js` and not `iojs script.js` so the symlink is just a helper.
- solomone 12y ago
  It's for bin scripts such as NPM which refer to the executable directly. See here: https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/249 https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/249
adregan 12y ago
Homebrew asked me to overwrite my node symlink with the iojs symlink. I decided to link iojs to iojs on my own. I hope I'm not spinning myself into some technical debt here, but for now, I'd like to maintain both.
- ChiChou 12y ago
  Some npm modules require specific version of node. If iojs overwrites `node` you may see node-gyp use algernative fallback build, which causes installation failure. At least now, the better way is to keep symlink to node as node. Use iojs when needed.

scope 12y ago

how would one go about deploying (say on Heroku) an iojs app?

silverwind 12y ago
Heroku has pretty good node support, but I'd doubt they support replacing the binary yet, so you'd have to wait for Heroku to support that. For manual deployment, the single iojs binary and your project folder should suffice, along with a way to start/restart your app automatically.
- tlrobinson 12y ago
  Heroku supports arbitrary "buildpacks", it should be easy to create one for iojs.
- btown 12y ago
  Heroku's way ahead of you... https://github.com/heroku/heroku-buildpack-nodejs/blob/a77cd257d1052d7bcffd5b5b261ee9794703daac/bin/compile#L36 https://github.com/heroku/heroku-buildpack-nodejs/blob/a77cd... EDIT: To clarify, though I haven't tried it myself, it looks like you can just specify `"engine.iojs": "1.0.0"` in your package.json, and Heroku will install the entire io.js system for you.
  - j_0 12y ago
    Came across this just before opening this thread, you are correct https://twitter.com/hunterloftis/status/555234067520565249 https://twitter.com/hunterloftis/status/555234067520565249
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
hunterloftis 12y ago
Heroku node maintainer here. No official docs yet (it's like an hour old already! :) but it works about the way you might guess: use engines.iojs instead of engines.node in your package.json. (screencast: https://twitter.com/HunterLoftis/status/555234067520565249 https://twitter.com/HunterLoftis/status/555234067520565249) We're also excited to see node hit a 1.0 and merge in new V8, ES6 features, etc. I'm especially excited about Cluster's round-robin load balancing which has been a compelling reason to use 'unstable 0.11' for a while.

simlevesque 12y ago

I have no issue with this fork but why oh why did they drop semantic versioning ? Do they want us to waste our time reading every single changelog ?

elisee 12y ago
They didn't drop semantic versioning (assuming you're talking about http://semver.org/ http://semver.org/), they're switching to it (see https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/28 https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/28). Node.js uses MINOR even = stable, odd = unstable (which is not semver) and is still in 0.x even though it's been used by giants in production all over the world for a couple years.
politician 12y ago
Honest question, do you have good luck with semantic versioning? I find it's pretty hit or miss on whether an X.Y.2 patch breaks functionality in the previous X.Y.1 build.

nickfargo 12y ago

ls -l /usr/local/bin/node lrwxr-xr-x 1 502 staff 4 Jan 13 20:10 /usr/local/bin/node -> iojs Is this necessary?

elisee 12y ago
Yes, lots of packages depend on "the JavaScript executable" being called node. Discussion: https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/43 https://github.com/iojs/io.js/issues/43
tree_of_item 12y ago
Yes, I've watched some of the io.js minutes on YouTube and they basically reached a consensus that this was definitely necessary. They want to be a drop in replacement for Node.js.

AbeEstrada 12y ago

In case you want to install it with `brew` https://github.com/smockle/homebrew-iojs https://github.com/smockle/homebrew-iojs

_greim_ 12y ago

I suspect there will be a split in the npm ecosystem now, not so much along node/iojs lines but along es5/es6 lines. There's already been lots of discussion about whether module builders should publish es6 code, or should everything be transpiled down to es5 code in order to keep the ecosystem unified (the unspoken caveat being, around es5). I think es5 is a dinosaur as of today, so I say go ahead and publish es6 code, and if you want to be nice to es5 people then add a prepublish transpiler that makes something like this possible: // es6 people can do var foo = require('foo'); // es5 people can do var foo = require('foo/es5');

wycats 12y ago
Important to note: because JavaScript itself is always backwards-compatible (1JS), any code that runs on Node will run on iojs, but not necessarily vice versa. That means there need not be a split in the ecosystem: people who want maximal coverage can target ES5, while people who want the latest features can target ES6. Unlike the browser, however, where people can't control their runtimes, I suspect there will be much less tolerance for sticking with older versions of JavaScript. Indeed, the pain and suffering people have felt with IE6 will likely make everyone much more willing to reject an unnecessary lowest-common-denominator approach on the server. We're liberated on the server. Let's act like it.
- emgee3 12y ago
  > Important to note: because JavaScript itself is always backwards-compatible (1JS), any code that runs on Node will run on iojs, but not necessarily vice versa. Though I'd imagine this will not hold true with addons, seeing as there are vastly different versions of the V8 engine.
- _greim_ 12y ago
  > We're liberated on the server. I'm liberated on the server in my own app, but not necessarily if I'm publishing something for everyone to use. In that case I'm either forced to feature-detect my way along, or target certain engines. The reason I think the latter will happen is devs to whom node was an escape-hatch from client-side hell will loathe the idea of going back. E.g. [1] [1] https://twitter.com/brianleroux/status/554753200503271424 https://twitter.com/brianleroux/status/554753200503271424

nsamuell 12y ago

And so it begins

_almosnow 12y ago

From their changelog, it seems that addons changed, does anyone know if current npm packages will still be usable? Also, good to see bnoorhuids in there.

chadpaulson 12y ago

Congratulations to the io.js team! I look forward to future releases. Specifically, no longer having to use --harmony_arrow_functions.

domenicd 12y ago
Ugh, please don't use that. The semantics of --harmony_arrow_functions are totally different from real arrow functions. Your code will break horribly.
- jkrems 12y ago
  ...not to mention the habit of triggering assertion errors when combined with let-scopes.

malkia 12y ago

Without reading, just looking I thought it would be about Steve Dekorte's Io Language targeting javascript.

DennisP 12y ago
Same here, got my hopes up. Kinda wish they hadn't overloaded that name.

thomasfoster96 12y ago

From what I can understand, io.js is now node with the latest version of v8 and ES6(+ES7) features enabled by default (as opposed to behind a flag). I'm wondering, what technical reasons are there for Node not using the latest version of v8 for each release? I can understand Node keeping some new ES6/7 features behind a flag (just as some are behind a flag in Chrome).

ivank 12y ago
V8 updates bring incompatible changes to the V8 API, and many node extensions written in C++ need to be updated. Hence the decision to stick with an old V8, even though it's no longer maintained by Google. There is a compatibility layer to assist with making these modules work across different V8 versions: https://github.com/rvagg/nan https://github.com/rvagg/nan

bsimpson 12y ago

I understand that Node was lagging behind on merging newer versions of V8, but holy hell: how did they have so many patches to the standard library that weren't properly released?

hayd 12y ago

Well, that escalated quickly.

waitingkuo 12y ago

I can unalias my `alias node=node --harmony` now!!

maga 12y ago

Since there are features in Io that are neither in the current version nor planned for the future versions of Node, I guess Io.js should be explicitly specified as an engine in the package.json file of Io-specific modules. Tracking those modules will be a good metric of how well Io is received by the community.

jorangreef 12y ago

Congratulations to the team who made this possible. Thanks for your hard work. Looking forward to switching binaries.

tuananh 12y ago

it seems it uninstall `node` when install itself.

stepstep 12y ago
It just overwrites the node symlink. > "This package will install io.js v1.0.0 and npm v2.1.18 into /usr/local/. The binary /usr/local/bin/iojs will also be symlinked as /usr/local/bin/node."
- dustinls 12y ago
  The windows install for this took the liberty of removing my original nodejs install, removed the binary and batch files from the program files\nodejs directory, even though I opted to install iojs to its own folder. Nodejs shortcuts are removed from start menu, and path variables were removed as well. Go to reinstall nodejs, and that install says a later version is already installed and cancels the install without giving me an option to install anyway.
- tuananh 12y ago
  i was talking about windows installer.

Exuma 12y ago

Sorry but (Beta stability) looks like it says "bestiality." I would recommend changing that...

duncanawoods 12y ago

In their words, io.js is "A spork of Node.js with an open governance model". Hmm. Lets hope the spork gets spooned so that no projects get knifed. If not then I guess we have to hope for a knork so we don't get stuck with a couple of chopsticks. Glossary Forking : Creating a fork to intentionally diverge from main-line development. Spooning : Merging a fork back into the main line of a project Sporking : Creating a fork that you would really like to become the next main-line version but you kinda have to prove its awesome first (sporks are pretty awesome) Knifing : Action killing a project, abandon hope :( Knorking : A fork replaces the original project which dies off i.e. a fork knifes the original Chopsticking : Two forks vie for popularity splitting the community and becoming lone chopsticks. Chopsticks need to work together to make stuff happen!

Fishrock123 12y ago
For posterity to anyone who still reads this, the spork thing is mostly my fault. And it sort of caught on. I do website and irc stuff for io.js and I had trouble describing what the project was in relation to node.js. So I called it a spork, because "sporks are friendlier". Whatever that means. Aside from being friendly. Proof is somewhere in the io.js irc logs back near when the project sporked. http://logs.libuv.org/io.js http://logs.libuv.org/io.js
benihana 12y ago
groan Don't get me wrong, thanks for the information. But seriously. It's like when you come up with a whimsical naming scheme for your home network devices and you get trapped in that naming scheme and have to come up with more and more obscure Lithuanian folk demons that fit into your conventions and it becomes a parody of itself and you're not sure if you're serious or joking anymore.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- jscheel 12y ago
  I named my new external drive "Rama". Not sure how far I can take that, though.

mdemo 12y ago

io.js version management https://github.com/demohi/ivm https://github.com/demohi/ivm

evantahler 12y ago

Congratulations on the release! Keep moving JS-server-stuff forward!

hmans 12y ago

Anyone fork it yet?

sambeau 12y ago

Am I alone in being bemused and amused by this: Version 1.0.1 (Beta stability) Surely the main point of a 1.0 release is "stability" and to no longer be "beta"?

stephenr 12y ago
To me it just follows on the ridiculousness of the Node community in general. A tool at version 0.10 and everyone screams about how stable it is and can't wait to bet their business on it. A bunch of people are unhappy and fork the project, and make the initial version 1.0, but make a point of saying (despite not using a related version number/identifier) that it's beta. Realistically it sounds like both projects should be at v0.9.x.
- namuol 12y ago
  This seems like a step away from "ridiculous" to me. Declaring something as 1.0 means that any 1.X releases are going to be backwards-compatible with the 1.0 spec. This is objectively different than versioning something 0.X, which implies that the baseline spec is not finalized. Calling something "Beta", however, just means that a feature-complete major version is still being actively developed (i.e. new minor features and bugfixes). In other words "1.0 Beta" just means "Stable spec, active codebase".
  - stephenr 12y ago
    So why is it called "1.0.1" (and now 1.0.1 on the homepage) and not "1.0.0-beta" ?
    - sturadnidge 12y ago
      The 1.0.0 release was called 1.0.0 - there has been a patch release since. Pretty much any software I can think of lists the latest release on the homepage rather than linking to a static version, but you're right it's a little confusing that specifying a version in the querystring doesn't actually appear to link directly to that version. EDIT: confusing if the intention of the iojs team was to have the querystring actually mean something... they may well not have that intention, in which case meh :)

misterdai 12y ago

Here's the most recent minutes (2014-12-19) for the Node.js Advisory Board where they discussed Io.js (while considering their 0.12 release). https://github.com/joyent/nodejs-advisory-board/blob/master/meetings/2014-12-19/minutes.md#node-012 https://github.com/joyent/nodejs-advisory-board/blob/master/...

pascalo 12y ago

Is there a ubuntu ppa for this already?

Touche 12y ago

Can this be installed with Node side-by-side or does it take over the `node` name?

AdamCraven 12y ago
It takes over the `node` name via symlinks. But you can have a working REPL side by side by overwriting with the prior node one again. Node isn't uninstalled.
ericclemmons 12y ago
nvm is being updated to support installing both project-specific node and io.js libraries.
iamdeedubs 12y ago
It gets symlinked to node and npm

grandalf 12y ago

Any advice on whether it's better to use ES6 or Coffeescript?

antihero 12y ago
I think that ES6 is going to reduce the need for things like CoffeeScript, or at least a lot of what people use (arrow functions, for instance).
robinricard 12y ago
First of all they're not the same thing. Coffeescript transpiles to JS (ES3 or 4 if I remember well) and ES6 is a new standard (not finished yet). Maybe one day coffee may compile to ES6 (but that's not likely since that would break support with older browsers). As said before, ES6 may reduce the need of transpiled languages but won't replace them. From my point of view, ES6 will never replace ClojureScript nor TypeScript (ES6 doesn't bring the power of a LISP like clojure or the type system of TS). As for coffee, many people may still prefer its more lightweight syntax that ES6 does not intend to replace either. Let's say that ES6 will provide a better runtime that may make transpiled languages less useful. Yes, ES6 does arrow functions and classes but it also provides many more cool stuff that the transpiled languages may never support such as generators if they intend to keep backward compat to older browsers. If you are in this case you should bet on ES6. If you don't care and are happy with what's included in coffee, use coffee ! You can always compile it to JS and continue your project with ES6 ! To sum up, transpiled languages are not dead and are still way more flexible than vanilla JS (as they don't depend on a big specification such as the ES specs) but ES6 does improve the runtime, and one day transpiled languages may use this new runtime.
- grandalf 12y ago
  Thanks -- that meshes with my impression so far. Is it smart/reasonable to use the es6 shim today?
- kylemathews 12y ago
  Support for generators has been merged into Coffeescript master — https://github.com/jashkenas/coffeescript/pull/3240 https://github.com/jashkenas/coffeescript/pull/3240

roelvanhintum 12y ago

Now that browsers are starting to be compatible, lets make js on the server incompatible...

debacle 12y ago

This is cool and I am excited. I have been playing with Node for a while but the pace towards stable was so glacial I couldn't take the software seriously.

drderidder 12y ago

Node got forked because it got corped. When a corporation sinks their hooks into an active open source project, it's only a matter of time. Mysql, Maria, Hudson, Jenkins... same story. io.js is the way forward, and congrats to the core team.

TazeTSchnitzel 12y ago
Plenty of corporations have successfully managed open-source projects.
- vlunkr 12y ago
  Yes. And I wouldn't compare Joyent with Oracle.
munificent 12y ago
> When a corporation sinks their hooks into an active open source project, it's only a matter of time. An ironic statement given that one of the main motivations for io.js is to upgrade to the new awesome versions of V8 with all of its great new features. V8, of course, has always been "corped": it was created and is maintained almost entirely by Google.

antouank 12y ago

Nodeup podcast 81 about io.js, with Mikeal Rogers, Isaac Schlueter and Chris Dickinson. http://nodeup.com/eightyone http://nodeup.com/eightyone

gobengo 12y ago

$> diff <(node --v8-options | grep harmony) <(./iojs --v8-options | grep harmony) 1,6c1,18 < --harmony_typeof (enable harmony semantics for typeof) < --harmony_scoping (enable harmony block scoping) < --harmony_modules (enable harmony modules (implies block scoping)) < --harmony_proxies (enable harmony proxies) < --harmony_collections (enable harmony collections (sets, maps, and weak maps)) < --harmony (enable all harmony features (except typeof)) --- > --es_staging (enable all completed harmony features) > --harmony (enable all completed harmony features) > --harmony_shipping (enable all shipped harmony fetaures) > --harmony_modules (enable "harmony modules (implies block scoping)" (in progress)) > --harmony_arrays (enable "harmony array methods" (in progress)) > --harmony_array_includes (enable "harmony Array.prototype.includes" (in progress)) > --harmony_regexps (enable "harmony regular expression extensions" (in progress)) > --harmony_arrow_functions (enable "harmony arrow functions" (in progress)) > --harmony_proxies (enable "harmony proxies" (in progress)) > --harmony_sloppy (enable "harmony features in sloppy mode" (in progress)) > --harmony_unicode (enable "harmony unicode escapes" (in progress)) > --harmony_tostring (enable "harmony toString") > --harmony_numeric_literals (enable "harmony numeric literals") > --harmony_strings (enable "harmony string methods") > --harmony_scoping (enable "harmony block scoping") > --harmony_classes (enable "harmony classes (implies block scoping & object literal extension)") > --harmony_object_literals (enable "harmony object literal extensions") > --harmony_templates (enable "harmony template literals")