| ▲ | kaoD 6 hours ago |
| 8 years is not super old, or even old. It's important to understand software maturity cycles for core components. |
|
| ▲ | yipinwong 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| "old" is relative term. Given @TheRogue's account is 4 years old, maybe new to field. If so, it feels "old". I understand your sentiment of justifying not being "old". but you gotta bring up "legacy code". "Working Effectively with Legacy Code" defines legacy code as code without tests thus hard to change it easily or with confidence. So either @TheGuardian is discussing about the age of software relative to his/her perspective or confused "legacy code" without understanding deno code base. |
| |
| ▲ | hbn 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If 8 years is "super old" in terms of software, what is Windows? Or Emacs? Or old Fortran software from the 50s in the Voyager software? | | |
| ▲ | yipinwong 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Define "super old" or just "old". It's relative measurement. When you are 9th grader, even a freshman college student feels way older. But as you are in your 30s, you feel less of difference. Same thing here, How do you define Windows and Emacs being "old"? For those who's been using it for decades, not as old as Voyager software. For those who lived through those times, Windows and Emacs feels younger. See where I am going with it? --- If you have a nephew or a kid, they will say you are "old". But your parents will consider you "young" for the rest of their lives. | | |
| ▲ | 1dom 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | In the context of software, I think "how old is old" depends on how web based the software has been over its lifetime. I think 8 years is old for software that has heavily Web based like Deno. But Windows and Emacs have had portions of their lifetime without the Web in a meaningful way, so 8 years would be young. | | |
| ▲ | yipinwong 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | ty. I like this over others as it uses the "web" as the basis for relativity. |
|
| |
| ▲ | tosti an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | Ancient |
| |
| ▲ | bilalq 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > "Working Effectively with Legacy Code" defines legacy code as code without tests thus hard to change it easily or with confidence. This is not a universally accepted definition. I've owned plenty of services with 95%+ unit test coverage, massive integ test suites, and synthetic canary tests that ran every minute that I would consider legacy. Plenty of AI slop today gets barfed out with 100% test coverage, but much of it is legacy from day 1. | | |
| ▲ | yipinwong 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I aggree thre are many defs. I only used that ex as it's easy to use and understand. What would you consider legacy? (not trynna fight, just wondering what you consider as one) |
|
|
|
| ▲ | SenHeng 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It may not be old, but it sure hasn’t caught on much after 8 years. I did remember a lot of posts about migrating cloud functions/lambdas to deno initially, but not much since. I’m taking the stance that no news is bad news here. If it was good, people would be doing Resume Driven Dev with deno and we would be buried in those articles. Alas. |
|
| ▲ | hbn 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Also it didn't hit 1.0 until 2020 so it's more accurate to say it's 6 years old. |
|
| ▲ | TheRoque 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| It's not that old, but it's old enough that it should have gained a bit of traction, it should have been mentioned in more discussions etc. And ultimately adopted more. It's purely a gut feeling though because I didn't run any numbers |
