HN Explorer

My main concern with Deno and Bun

2 points by abdellah123 ↗ HN
Deno is an alternative server runtime for JavaScript. I like its standard library, commitment to browser standards and I'm excited about the recent Jupyter support. Super cool stuff.

But I won't write servers in Deno and put them to production in my own servers. (I don't like serverless)

You see, Deno(and Bun)'s business model is built around serverless (Deno deploy). And Deno deploy is ANOTHER runtime.

This means you're self hosting a version of Deno that's different from the majority of the Deno customer base.

Will the Deno open-source runtime receive the same love as Deno deploy runtime? even if Deno Deploy is the actual source of money? really?

How many people will use Deno to run servers on their own hardware? if that number is low, then I'd rather use Node.

P.S: Bun will probably be in the same boat (see https://oven.sh/). Deno already launched Deno deploy, so they're getting the attention here.

4 comments

[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 249 ms ] thread
1vuio0pswjnm7
A different perspective: I see the potential to use Deno or Bun as a client, a replacement for advertising-sponsored browsers than run Javascript.

For example, if someone has a script and wants to share it over the internet, using Deno or Bun maybe I can run it from a remote location (or download it first).

I am a web user not a web developer. I prefer noncommercial uses of the web.

frou_dh
Well you don't really need to speculate because the normal Deno runtime (aka Deno CLI) has been around for ~5 years and you can assess the quality of work that has been put into it.
GianFabien
I prefer Deno to Node. Ryan Dahl took his experience with Node and fixed the problems in creating Deno. Shame that so much effort is expended into making Deno compatible with Node. I have completely switched over to Deno and have wiped Node off my dev system.
fithisux
Me too. I wish pulsar used demo or bun instead of node for development.