Because this author does not like Node.JS apparently. Like I said, I would love to see some examples that clarify what the writer is intending us, as his audience, to learn.
I am always interested to hear what people do not like about a language, and I think it says a lot about what they really know.
I get the point of this article...but it is a bit bland, short, and doesn't really offer much in the ways of why this is dangerous or how it applies to the average Joe.
Maybe with some more meat this article would be a big selling point; however, right now it offers, what may be a completely valid point, masqueraded behind a very thin veil of, "Because others say so!"
Tell me why!! Give me an example. Show me how Node.JS fails at distributed concurrency because it is an over-use of it! :)
Yes I would very much like to know what those dangers actually ARE, please! And particularly, how those dangers are different to the things you have to worry about when writing anything that runs on a web server - e.g. Servlets.
You didnt make a good case against nodejs. If it's about Javascript, then it's not a good criticism.
A good case against it could be it's concurrency model,the fact that node maintainers dont control V8,or the difficulty to use streams.But you didnt say anything interesting that would make a business reconsider its use of nodejs.
Even worse,you didnt even talk about alternative solutions,like GO, or scala. Some big businesses like SAGE or PAYPAL went with nodejs successfully, care to explain why they made the wrong choice?
> my main problem with Node.js is that it makes it easier to do something that most development teams probably shouldn't ought to be. Namely, distributed concurrent programming.
So programming is for the elite, and the rest of the peons ought to be relegated to scripting and spreadsheets, it seems.
The overall spirit of this article, taken to the nth degree, would imply that any high-level language or any platform should not exist, but rather a few chosen developers should be allowed to program in assembler.
11 comments
[ 7.2 ms ] story [ 50.8 ms ] threadI get the point of this article...but it is a bit bland, short, and doesn't really offer much in the ways of why this is dangerous or how it applies to the average Joe.
Maybe with some more meat this article would be a big selling point; however, right now it offers, what may be a completely valid point, masqueraded behind a very thin veil of, "Because others say so!"
Tell me why!! Give me an example. Show me how Node.JS fails at distributed concurrency because it is an over-use of it! :)
You didnt make a good case against nodejs. If it's about Javascript, then it's not a good criticism.
A good case against it could be it's concurrency model,the fact that node maintainers dont control V8,or the difficulty to use streams.But you didnt say anything interesting that would make a business reconsider its use of nodejs.
Even worse,you didnt even talk about alternative solutions,like GO, or scala. Some big businesses like SAGE or PAYPAL went with nodejs successfully, care to explain why they made the wrong choice?
I'm not sure what's your point,care to explain?
Those who don't like the Javascript part of Node.js might be interested in the C++ port:
https://github.com/d5/node.native
So programming is for the elite, and the rest of the peons ought to be relegated to scripting and spreadsheets, it seems.
The overall spirit of this article, taken to the nth degree, would imply that any high-level language or any platform should not exist, but rather a few chosen developers should be allowed to program in assembler.