@sebmck in Rome, have you abstracted away the 'host environment' in any way to make the toolchain available in contexts like the browser? Certainly would be amazing to have a tight, UX friendly ecosystem like that in the browser.
-
-
Replying to @filearts
Yeah, enough is abstracted that it could work outside of Node. I’ve minimised my usage of Node APIs. There’s abstractions around the parts they matter. In fact, it would be easy to make Rome has WebWorkers for workers instead of spawning processes. The RPC is very agnostic.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Could also prettily run in Deno then?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Potentially*
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
In fact, I was (sort of still am), considering bundling the Rome CLI with my own version of Node/whatever. Would make it easy to use Rome outside of the Node-ecosystem. Would also allow easy distribution. Similar mode to Yarn, available everywhere: homebrew, apr-get, rubygems etc
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
I don’t think that’s a good idea if you want usage from Node.js module authors. We have to run our tests across a range of Node.js versions (2-4 at any given time). Tests frameworks should run across all LTS runtimes without problems.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Of course! If Rome were distributed on npm then it wouldn’t bundle anything. For external distribution it makes more sense. It has a lot of implications, which is why I’ve yet to form a strong opinion. If Rome supports running in a different host which is faster, then makes...
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
sense to promote it. Any test/code execution though makes it really complicated because it’s host-specific.
-
-
If you can run it in another machine, I’d distribute it as a docker image.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
he/him 