Hacker News Reader

Comment by pupppet | Hacker News Reader

I don't know why this is being downvoted. Ryan Dahl, the original developer of Node, moved on to build Deno.

Ryan definitely deserves credit for the initial development of node.js. But that phrasing makes it sound like he moved from node to deno - which isn't the case. He moved from node to other projects. Over the total lifetime of node, Ryan was _not_ involved for far longer than he _was_ involved (even when only counting the time before Deno was created).

The top-level comment seems to suggest that Ryan was an integral part of node development before deno and that "getting him back" was relevant. Which isn't what happened. There are people who worked on node and moved to deno. But Ryan isn't really one of them.

It’s being downvoted because the Node community seems to have a hard time accepting constructive criticism... which is ironically also at the core of much of what’s wrong with Node in general.

Constructive criticism is specific and helpful. OP is just kvetching.

Can you elaborate on this? I've always felt that the Node community, and the wider JavaScript community alongside it, has always been open to and embracing of constructive criticism, whether or not it's regarding the language itself (TC39, codemods / babel transformers, TypeScript, and any language that targets (Node)JS's ecosystem), established frameworks and libraries (underscore -> lodash, moment.js -> luxon), package management (pnpm, yarn), or even governance (the io.js fork, which was later on merged back into Node) and module systems (es modules, commonjs, et cetera).

Ryan's original criticisms regarding Node were totally valid, but most of them weren't really easily addressable without significant breakage or a long migration strategy, which potentially could've caused a _lot_ of issues and unclarity for many years.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com