Sure, most PCs have 16 and 32GB of RAM today, so one could ask whether it is an issue, but with the world of IoT in mind which needs such technologies and consists of mostly embedded devices, …. For interpreted languages, such as JavaScript or Python, lint is also a term that refers to syntatic discrepancies. Nowadays though the term is applied to generic tools that are used to flag suspicious usage in code written in any programming language. Same functionality can be achieved with maybe 1 or 2MB of RAM usage. Lint was the name for a particular piece of software that flagged suspicious and non-portable constructs (most likely bugs) in the C language. JSLint generates quite a bit of complaints for this section, and Id like to selectively disable it for that stretch. Except for one stretch, which is some very convoluted obfuscated code that is embedded within the larger context. But running a little server app to publish one stupid byte with a RAM usage of 130MB is just bullshit. I have a huge script that passes JSLint (including avoidance of all bad parts). The built-in formatter options are: checkstyle. For example, -format json uses the json formatter. You can specify a formatter using the -format or -f flag in the CLI. An option specification can look like this: /jslint nomen: true, debug: true, evil: false, vars: true /. ESLint comes with several built-in formatters to control the appearance of the linting results, and supports third-party formatters as well. It is also possible to set those options within the source of a script. Nice to see how little code is needed to do something like that. The implementation of JSLint accepts an option object that allows you to determine the subset of JavaScript that is acceptable to you. I played around with the OPC-UA stuff a bit. java -jar RHINODIR/js.jar jslint.js file-path-to-be-checked write a script to run the above command. But the resources a even tiny NodeJS app needs is just some kind of joke and far away from something which could be called “efficient”. Improving the quality of JavaScript code. I really like the way node makes use of async io. Maybe it doesn’t add too much around the engine, but I think we have different understandings of “small”. Node isn’t that much more than a smallish wrapper This is for sure, but one could port a function(ality) from one to another, without pointing to sense or nonesense. You simply don’t get to run JavaScript on Python.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |