spartanatreyu

You keep saying "relevance", and now other things like "gimmick" and "marketing".

Why are you so focused on "relevance"?

They're completely unrelated to Deno.

Node had problems, ts-node had problems, Deno fixes those problems for developers.

Separately, Bun trades solving some problems for solving other problems.

Developers are free to choose between runtimes based on what problems they encounter.

Personally I use node for existing web projects and deno for data processing and to compile scripts into redistributable binaries.

No one's asking nor wondering why you find looking at things in the sky beautiful.

They're asking why you're ascribing meaning to an arbitrary number of days. Months aren't subjective, they're arbitrary.

What to know about blue supermoons:

1. They literally mean nothing.
2. The change is imperceptible to everyone.
3. Expect useless clickbait slop about it until it passes.

stdlib.io is a data process/vis library, not a standard library.

jQuery was a DOM/Utility DX library (and also a compatibility layer before all browsers finally focussed on standards), not a standard library.

Deno people are trying so fucking hard to be relevant. It’s embarrassing. Bringing nothing to the table has been their MO from day 1.

Let's examine that.

Deno has always been:

(parapharing) "Hi, I'm the creator of Node and want to make it better but can't get everyone on board with the changes. So I'm going to create a new JS runtime. Node will need to implement these improvements to keep up or everyone will switch away from node. Either way, developers win."

We know it's been that way since he was a month into Deno's development in his famous talk: 10 Things I Regret About Node.js

Deno [...] Bringing nothing to the table [...]

Have a look through each of those 10 points he brought up, then compare that to node before, and node now. It's pretty clear he gave them the swift kick in the ass to start making those changes. We win. That's clearly a success.

What standard library?

JS has only had package/library hell

Who is this article for?

Firstly, it's basically just a repost of existing info from the mozilla article but now with ads.

Secondly, the puppeteer team left years ago to work on playwright which is now the better product, which also supports firefox through the webdriver-bidi standard...

So now I'm wondering... just who was this article for?

None of what you mentioned is actually about politics, it's just a list of outrage-bait

I use git log --graph --all --remotes --oneline whenever I need to shell into another computer, but it's still too barebones for regular use.

What specifically do you think is legacy in that comparison? The coloring? The horizontal layout? The whitespace?

Note: I've changed the first link from https://github.com/cxli233/FriendsDontLetFriends/network to https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/network. Still the same view, but just a different repo to highlight the problems

1. It's in a small non-responsive box
2. Ridiculous spacing

• If you want to see the commit messages, you either need to hover over a dot which increases visual scanning durations or you need to go to the commits view which only shows the commits on a single branch

3. It doesn't show commit messages
4. It's scrolling horizontally
5. Branches cannot be collapsed
6. Branches cannot be hidden/ignored
7. No way to search for commits
8. No way to select multiple commits

• Which also means no way to diff any specific commits together
• And there's also no way to perform an action over a range of commits
• And there's also no way to start a merge/merge-request/pull-request/etc... between two commits

9. No way to sort by date/topologically
10. Keyboard controls only moves view instead of selecting commits

I'll stop here at 10 reasons (or more if you count the dot points), otherwise I'll be here all day.

The network view lays out forks and their branches, not only [local]/[local+1-remote] branches.

Yes, but the others can do that while still being usable.

I don’t know what IDE that miro screenshot is from. [...]

It's gitkraken

[...] But I see it as wasteful and confusing. The author initials are useless and wasteful, picking away focus. The branch labels are far off from the branch heads. [...]

The picture doesn't do it justice, it's not a picture, it's an interactive view.

You can resize things, show/hide columns, filter values in columns to only show commits with certain info (e.g. Ignore all dependabot commits), etc... Here's an example video.

[...]The coloring seems confusing.

You can customise all that if you want.

The first link is a totally different purpose than the second two.

The first link is going to there because that's the only graph view that github has.

I've got to say, seeing this:

https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/network

instead of something like this:

https://fork.dev/blog/posts/collapsible-graph/

or this:

https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:4800/format:webp/0*60NIVdYj2f5vETt2.png

feels pretty damn legacy to me.

I'd recommend removing as many variables as possible.

Try getting a single html page to work (no mongoose, no preact, no vite, no tailwind).

If you can't get that to work, then no amount of tinking in preact/vite/tailwind/mongoose will help you.

Once you have a single page running, you can look at the next steps:

For scripting: try plain js, then js + mongoose, then preact + mongoose. If a step fails, rely on the step before it.

For styling: try plain css, then a micro css framework that doesn't require a build step (e.g. https://purecss.io/, https://picocss.com/), then tailwind if you really want to try messing around with vite again.