Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rewrite into Haxe #918

Closed
KOLANICH opened this issue Apr 23, 2019 · 7 comments

Comments

@KOLANICH
Copy link

commented Apr 23, 2019

This may be helpful to port probot to the languages supported by Haxe.

@welcome

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Apr 23, 2019

Thanks for opening this issue. A contributor should be by to give feedback soon. In the meantime, please check out the contributing guidelines and explore other ways you can get involved.

@issue-label-bot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Apr 23, 2019

Issue-Label Bot is automatically applying the label enhancement ➕ to this issue, with a confidence of 0.93. Please mark this comment with 👍 or 👎 to give our bot feedback!

Links: app homepage, dashboard and code for this bot.

@gr2m

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 23, 2019

That is out of scope for this project, I’m afraid. But if you’d like to do a rewrite, you can create a new repository and link to it from here, so people looking for haxe in the probot repository will find it in future?

@KOLANICH

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

commented Apr 24, 2019

There are 2 nuances:

  1. Haxe supports JS. So if it is rewritten in Haxe, a separate JS version is not needed.
  2. Haxe is considered to be ECMAScript dialect.
@gr2m

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Apr 24, 2019

I’m glad you are so excited about it. What problem would it solve?

@KOLANICH

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

commented Apr 24, 2019

I’m glad you are so excited about it.

I am not excited. I have already tried to port some libs from python to haxe without spoiling code structure but have failed. And where it compiles, the resulting code looks ugly, non-idiomatic and makes impression of unneeded overhead. In fact it seems that one cannot just take and port apps to haxe without redesigning. It's the price of fitting into Procrustean bed of intersection of all the supported languages.

What problem would it solve?

Problem of dependence on JS ecosystem, like Node and the most importantly npm and its packages. In particular, I wanna use python to write my bot and I wanna do it without any NPM and JS libs. And later rewrite it into C++ for lower footprint.

@JasonEtco

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 24, 2019

Thank you for the explanation @KOLANICH 🙏 I think that Probot is in a spot where we've recently refactored it into TypeScript, and are still evaluating what that looks like from an open-source contribution perspective. My biggest concern with Haxe is that it doesn't have wide adoption from the community, which means that contributing to projects using Haxe is yet un-tested.

Problem of dependence on JS ecosystem, like Node and the most importantly npm and its packages.

This is super interesting, but I don't think that Probot is the right project for this purpose. It's not a wildly complicated codebase, with only a few core operations - receiving webhook payloads and authenticating API requests. For that reason, I think its more viable to just build Probot in another language - see #401 for a previous discussion.

I'm going to close this issue for the above reasons - @gr2m feel free to reopen if you feel differently!

@JasonEtco JasonEtco closed this Apr 24, 2019

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
3 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.