moment VS async

We could control the DST flip by setting the test's input time to the appropriate time of year (summer/winter). However we couldn't control the timezone. We had to adjust the expected data in the test 🤢 using the same library which the production code used (momentjs).

8. Moment.js

This may sound a bit general but we can't forget about well-tought code. If we are using a lot of external dependencies, we can check if there aren't many lighter alternatives. Example? Some people are still using moment.js for date formatting. Why not use a lightweight 2kb alternative instead? Writing clean, organized and maintainable code won't give us a huge score boost but we are trying to save every byte of data, right? 😉

We all know the pain of working with dates in Javascript. It needs to be more explicit, has almost no method, and could not be more clunky. For example, to create the Date January 1, 2023, you have to write a new Date (2023, 0, 1), which can be confusing for beginners, and overall just not that clear. And because of these reasons, the community has made many libraries that attempt to make Date easier to work with over the past years. Like momentjs or Date-fns. But the good news is that you won't need these third-party libraries any longer. The Temporal Date API in Javascript attempts to completely replace the Date object and fix all of the issues we generally face when working with dates.

moment was put into maintenance mode in 2020 and has gained 7 million weekly downloads to 19 million/week since then.

Moment is a JavaScript date library for parsing, validating, manipulating, and formatting dates. It allows displaying of date as per localization and in a human-readable format.

Luxon is a powerful and lightweight JavaScript library for working with dates and times. It was created as an alternative to the popular Moment.js library, with the goal of being faster, smaller, and easier to use.

It allows users to create tasks, change their schedule and duration with drag-and-drop, add dependency lines, and review extra information on tasks via tooltips. You can add multiple timescales to the chart. The list of possible options includes Quarter Day, Half Day, Full Day, Week, and Month. There are also some customization opportunities such as changing the tooltip content with custom HTML, modifying the appearance of task bars and dependency lines, and setting the default timescale. It should be noted that Frappe Gantt has two dependencies: momentjs and snapsvg.

https://momentjs.com/ is a useful library for this exact thing.

Async/await is certainly not promises. In fact it would be much better implemented without promises as I proposed here: https://es.discourse.group/t/callback-based-simplified-async...

I would even say that async/await is anti-promise, it takes the main functionality of promises, a caching layer for results and errors that allows you to add the code continuation later and elsewhere (which is a major footgun imo) and coerces the execution flow back to going on the next line and provided immediately at compile time which results in a cleaner flow but not as clean, stateless, efficient or functional as if you were to remove the promises completely. Having an additional caching layer and state machine around every asynchronous function call is quite inefficient.

The essence of async/await is not promises, it's the underlying javascript generator (https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...) functionality combined with asynchronous code to stop and start the generator. It's the ability to pause and resume function execution based on asynchronous operations.

The promise functionality, the caching layer and state machine for results is basically sanitized away with async/await, it becomes dead-weight computation. The only benefit of promises in async/await code is being able to more easily interface with other promise laden code which you don't need once you have async/await and a library like https://www.npmjs.com/package/async for more complex cases.

Note that promises based async/await is also a mess of an implementation that breaks stack traces and needs to support tons of odd statement corner cases (basically anything that can return an object that could be a promise) whereas a continuation passing style async/await would be a much simpler implementation that would only apply to function calls and maintain stack traces. We get that stack trace support automatically because of the great work of whoever implemented javascript generators which seem to already carry stack traces across paused/resumed functions (if you don't wrap in promises).

I don't understand. Sure you could spawn a ton of processes, but things might be bogged down. There are utilities out there for doing work queues.... so only N workers are running at any one time. The async library has some utilities for that. https://github.com/caolan/async

If you are using lots of asynchronous functions, it can be worthwhile to use an asynchronous function library, instead of having to create your own utility functions. Async.js is a popular library that has many useful tools for dealing with asynchronous code.

There is a node package called async implementing this behavior (among many other things) in a function called mapLimit.

async

Async.js https://github.com/caolan/async or “async” allows you to easily execute functions in series or parallel without the need of nesting them back to back.