RawJS is a better way to call document.createElement()

Re:RawJS is a better way to call document.createElement() by jawns on Wednesday January 03, 2024 @11:16AM (#38855803)

"No known bugs" is not the brag that they think it is.

It's like someone peddling a medication and saying, "No known side effects."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:RawJS is a better way to call document.createElement() by ithkuil on Wednesday January 03, 2024 @11:22AM (#38855886)

"no known bugs" is technically the same as "may contain unknown bugs"

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:RawJS is a better way to call document.createElement() by lionkor on Wednesday January 03, 2024 @11:23AM (#38855900)

Author(s) of this may be the type of people to not use a library because it has a lot of open github issues

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:RawJS is a better way to call document.createElement() by Py_ on Wednesday January 03, 2024 @04:03PM (#38859875)

RawJS library author here.

What I meant was that it's a small library with a relatively small surface area for bugs, and it's been under pressure from a few different projects for some time now, and it's been quite a while since we have discovered any behaviour I would consider to be buggy.

I'm sorry you took this as a "brag". This wasn't the intention.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:RawJS is a better way to call document.createElement() by meowtimemania on Thursday January 04, 2024 @06:05AM (#38865596)

could be rewritten as "0 open bug reports".

[ Parent | on HN ]