JavaScript web apps considered valuable

Re:JavaScript web apps considered valuable by Wintamute on Thursday January 21, 2016 @10:44AM (#10945929)

I was talking about npm. And I find the JS community welcoming, friendly and passionate and for the more serious npm modules out there highly technically literate, but hey it's a subjective thing I suppose :/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:JavaScript web apps considered valuable by kuschku on Thursday January 21, 2016 @07:51PM (#10949894)

So, the package manager that doesn’t do proper deduplication and, thanks to nested dependencies, runs over the file path length limit on multiple platforms?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:JavaScript web apps considered valuable by Silhouette on Thursday January 21, 2016 @09:23PM (#10950345)

FYI, the nesting and deduplication were fixed in NPM 3. It uses a flat structure now.

Unfortunately, in their place the version resolution algorithm is now subject to order dependency: the same package.json file, run at the same time with the same packages available in the NPM repository, can give different results on different machines depending on what had already been installed.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:JavaScript web apps considered valuable by paulddraper on Thursday January 21, 2016 @11:03PM (#10950679)

Yep. Solved long file paths. All we had to give up was determinism!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:JavaScript web apps considered valuable by its2complicated on Thursday January 21, 2016 @09:31PM (#10950380)

Ha ha, the effing path length limit drove me crazy! There'd be 50 node_modules folders and Windows wouldn't let you delete anything; It was nuts! I had to start renaming directories to "a", "b", "c", and so on until I cut the size down. I like JS for quick personal projects, but I'm glad I don't use it professionally anymore.

[ Parent | on HN ]