I like what Deno is selling. URL like import path is great, I don't know why people are dismissing it. It is easy to get up-and-running quickly.
Looks like my personal law/rule is in effect again: The harsher HN critics are, the more successful the product will be. I have no doubt Deno will be successful.
The GoLang-like URL import and dependency management are indeed an innovation in simplicity while simultaneously offering better compatibility with browser JavaScript.
Perhaps the HN-hate is not about simplified greenfield tech as much as it is about breaking established brownfield processes and modules.
ultimately i guess it is about how/if deno caches its imports. with node.js/npm you have the exact same problems, just the source & sink occur at different places (package installation)
With Node.js you install the packages in a dev environment, and test extensively, then push all the code, including node_packages folder to production. Running npm on the prod server is forbidden. At least in theory =)
Almost all successful, mainstream, techs are like that. From a purely technical perspective, they are awful (or where awful at launch), they were just adopted because they were easy to use. When I say awful, I mean for professional use in high impact environments: financial, healthcare, automotive, etc.
Few people would argue that except for ease of use and ubiquity, any of these techs were superior to their competitors at launch or even a few years after.
After a while what happens is that these techs become entrenched and more serious devs have to dig in and they generally make these techs bearable. See Javascript before V8 and after, as an example.
A big chunk of the HN crowd is high powered professional developers, people working for FAANGs and startups with interesting domains. It's only normal they criticize what they consider half-baked tech.
Looks like my personal law/rule is in effect again: The harsher HN critics are, the more successful the product will be. I have no doubt Deno will be successful.