Conversation
|
I was looking into I'd be curious to know what are the performance implications. As you said, this is a built-time only tool, though I wouldn't like my build tool to consume 100% CPU when idle (which, correct me if I am wrong, would be the result of consuming |
|
@gajus no, it wouldn't consume 100% CPU while idle. First, |
|
What is blocking this PR? I hope to see this change implemented because the plugin seems unnecessarily bulky with the server-client set up. |
|
@chrisngobanh discussion & testing really. I'm a little nervous about it because I'm not crazy about hacking at Node.js the way that Honestly, the fluctuations in how events work between recent versions of Node (with some focus on Things like abbr/deasync#82 concern me as well… just having that in the dependency chain and having to ensure that the project re-builds as required for Node.js releases. I'm just struggling with how worthwhile it'd be. Honestly, abstracting the client/server piece into a standalone project may simplify the code base nice enough. Thoughts? |
This addresses the client-server concerns from #1 by using
deasyncto completely remove the client-server setup. I'm a little wary about howdeasyncachieves its goal, but have looked a fair amount into possible improvements including replacing use of some privateprocessAPIs. To that end, I've opened abbr/deasync#75.This is, however, a build-only tool & should never really be used in production. So if for some reason something goes wrong because of this private API use, it's far less devastating in during a build than in production.