Never use a dependency that you could replace with an afternoon of programming

Re:Never use a dependency that you could replace with an aft... by parliament32 on Wednesday August 12, 2020 @02:14PM (#24135006)

Everyone who's used NPM in production for a not-insignificant amount of time has realized just how bad nodejs dependency hell can be. Unfortunately, webdev-du-jour has decided pulling in a hundred npm packages is better than writing a few hundred lines of code.

I keep hoping things like [1] are a joke but I'm starting to suspect they're not.

[1]https://www.npmjs.com/package/is-odd

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Never use a dependency that you could replace with an aft... by 5Qn8mNbc2FNCiVV on Wednesday August 12, 2020 @06:42PM (#24137930)

I'm sorry that my framework and bundler are using so many packages. Lemme just quickly install Android Studio and download a few gigabyte to develop and build my application. Ah yikes I'm on a different version, need to redownload now.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Never use a dependency that you could replace with an aft... by parliament32 on Thursday August 13, 2020 @01:05PM (#24145572)

At least Android Studio doesn't break when you try to deploy it a few months down the line (with package lock), with the exact same version, because a dependency of a dependency of a dependency made an unreviewed and untested "security fix" that caused a regression.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Never use a dependency that you could replace with an aft... by misterpurple45 on Thursday August 13, 2020 @05:21AM (#24141423)

And the is-odd package.json requires is-number! Jesus...

[ Parent | on HN ]