I suspect that someone being the auditors who are suspicious of opaque binary caches and insist on building everything from scratch.

I don't know. If that were the case, I'd imagine they would know why their build was taking hours and that it wasn't a Nix problem.

That was my reading, based on the fact that they glossed over Nix itself and attributed most of the issues to code complexity.

It explicitly says this, though:

> while much of that build time is attributable to Nix's way of building dependencies

And that part just doesn't make sense to me. I can't see any way in which specifically Nix's way of building dependencies would contribute to this. The compiling of the universe, sure, but then why mention Nix?

It does say that, but it's off in its own clause, then shifts focus away from it towards what seems like the focus of the auditors.

Part of the removed code:

    test("guy", function() {
      assert.equal(typeof babel.guy, "string");
    });

Facepalming so hard right now

In case you hadn't noticed, this was a joke commit. The code in question was never actually a real part of Babel.

I assure you, I understand what an easter egg is. I was facepalming at the test, which was doing the equivalent of:

    expect(true).toBe(true)

Thank you for heavily derailing the productive, technically meaningful conversation I was having. Next time I won't say anything since apparently productive and technically meaningful conversations aren't what this site is for.

Please take your badly-informed language bashing elsewhere.

I actually audit dependencies for a living, and the dependency model that JS uses is far, far preferable for auditability over the "monolithic tightly-coupled framework and a mountain of custom badly-maintained copy-pasted business logic" approach that is widely used elsewhere.

Seriously, piss off. You clearly don't understand the tools you're loudly complaining about, and it's interfering with what was otherwise a productive discussion about Nix and build times.

Please don't break the site guidelines yourself, regardless of how wrong or annoying other comments are or you feel they are. It only makes the thread even worse.

I've responded to the other user elsewhere, but actually your replies were worse than what you were replying to, even if you're right on the fundamentals. "Please take your badly-informed $thing elsewhere" and "Seriously, piss off" are well out of bounds here.

If you feel like another user is derailing the discussion, flag the comments (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsfaq.html). If you feel like more is needed, email [email protected] so we can take a look. We frequently moderate off-topic subthreads.