20 comments

[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 54.4 ms ] thread
Execute your code and get results right there and then

What results? Maybe it's just early and I'm being a grouch but I'm failing to see any use case for this

When or why would this be useful? I am not doubting there is no use case, I just don't see it.
Pick from encyclopedias of group sourced solutions to problems. It is a copypasta nailgun to help stick frame the newly settled Cloud Frontier. We can thank the OP when we are all slaving away in the code mines.
Yes! deposit your discertion skills :)
The use case is to quickly "harvest" snippets - Create function, see if it works, without the need to copy-paste to your cloud providers UI.

After creation, the functions are saved in your provider account, so you can re-visit your growing snippet library at any time.

Also, try the same code on multiple providers quickly by flicking a radio button.
So... it lets you execute JS in your browser?

Sorry if I fail to see how this is novel.

I think it uploads the code for example to AWS and then that code can be executed as a lambda function. Why would anyone need that is another question.
I think it's for running nodejs not "browser js" (via aws lambda or similar) without leaving the browser. I guess it's novel because it makes it easier to execute random nodejs?
{insert joke about serverless left padding-as-service here}
Why joke when you can http://left-pad.io/ ?
Absolutely glorious

> Padding and the input string are limited to anywhere between 1000 and 1024 characters in the free version, because we have to monetize to have enough runway to launch `right-pad.io` in Q3 2017 and annoying your customers into upgrades is a tried and true startup business development strategy

It's running code as a serverless function, On a cloud provider, not your browser. Not just JavaScript, and it can be re-used later (saved in your provider account). Hope this clarifies things!
A video walk through would be helpful. And why not for Firefox!?
Yes, please make it for Firefox too :)
Totally agree. Firefox port should be simple as changing 'chrome.storage' to 'browser.storage' (famous last words :P )