This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2023-10-23
Channels
- # aws-lambda (2)
- # beginners (40)
- # calva (9)
- # cider (17)
- # clojure (84)
- # clojure-europe (13)
- # clojure-nl (1)
- # clojure-norway (77)
- # clojure-uk (26)
- # conjure (1)
- # cursive (7)
- # datomic (7)
- # events (1)
- # exercism (1)
- # gratitude (2)
- # hyperfiddle (4)
- # improve-getting-started (10)
- # jobs-discuss (12)
- # malli (4)
- # missionary (12)
- # off-topic (22)
- # other-languages (4)
- # pedestal (3)
- # portal (6)
- # reagent (6)
- # reitit (1)
- # releases (1)
- # ring (4)
- # shadow-cljs (2)
- # thejaloniki (2)
- # tools-build (27)
- # tools-deps (4)
- # vim (6)
https://www.baldurbjarnason.com/2023/web-dev-without-node/ This seems like a useful guide to eliminating complexity in small-scale JS/web projects.
Wonderful post, but I think it misses the point a little bit. What angers me to use node on automated tests on the browser is not only how fragile the tooling is - but the fact that you are, essentially, using a different language and runtime than what your app will run
Like, you will run your code in Firefox / Safari / Chrome, so you use... node... to test it? Without a browser? With mocked web APIs? Stuff that only works in Node?
I agree with the post, but I think the pitch is higher - as an example, I was working with Typescript recently and while I was discussing the pain points of the tooling with a friend, I mentioned Pulsar. And he asked me where did I pull strength to work on a Node.JS project at my free time. And then, I answered - "well, Pulsar doesn't use any build tool, no webpack, no Babel, nothing of these - it's just "write Javascript and thing will work as expected". And he was 🤯, saying "I completely forgot that this is a thing that you can do!"