crater VS enquirer

yup, they reference it as an inspiration: https://github.com/rust-lang/crater

it's probably impossible to automate an entire ecosystem, and there is value to enabling a tighter integration within a project ecosystem (a subset of the language ecosystem).

Rather than hypothesising about an imagined tool you could look at the actual tool which of course is in Rust's source code repo: https://github.com/rust-lang/crater

> new proposed C++ changes - are checked against only easily and "well-known" accessible package.

Now that I have, so to say, shown you mine, lets see yours. Where is the tool to perform these checks in C++?

The "break things" part of "move fast" is not essential, Rust cares so much about breakage they literally compile and run the tests for every crate on crates.io and github using a tool called Crater. They do this just to test changes, even for stuff thats documented to be unstable, because thats just courtesy. And tooling makes it trivial to switch between Rust versions.

The bot's named Crater if you want to look into it more.

See https://github.com/rust-lang/crater

Rust compiler developers use a tool called Crater to test potentially breaking compiler changes on all crates (Rust's name for libraries) uploaded to the official repository. If plugin stability is the issue, maybe a solution along these lines would be better than merging these plugins to Neovim's core?

https://github.com/rust-lang/crater is the bot they use to test proposed compiler/stdlib changes against slices of the crates.io library up to and including "all of it".

The tool you're referring to is called Crater: https://github.com/rust-lang/crater.

I'm pretty certain this isn't actually true. You should look at the editions, etc. Rust also has an insane guarantee which I am certain C/C++ don't offer: It rebuilds its entire library ecosystem each time it ships to make sure nothing breaks (https://crater.rust-lang.org). I've never seen an instance were old code didn't compile on a new compiler. Rust isn't forwards compatible (new code compiles on an old compiler) of course, but what is?

jonschlinkert (Jon Schlinkert) · GitHub

Although I'm happy there is a way to bundle Node.js apps with support for pnpm, and for a modern-ish version of Node.js, it's somewhat slow in my experience to build locally. Interactivity doesn't have the greatest ecosystem there, especially with TypeScript. Best library I've found is Enquirer.

{ "name": "@jonschlinkert/omit-deep", "description": "Recursively omit specified keys from an object", "tags": ["object", "deep", "remove", "omit"], "version": "0.3.0", "author": "Jon Schlinkert (https://github.com/jonschlinkert)", "repository": "jonschlinkert/omit-deep", "bugs": "https://github.com/jonschlinkert/omit-deep/issues", "license": "MIT" }

In case you need to ask for user input, optionally you can use a prompt file. This is very useful to customize the output of the generator. Prompts are defined using a library named Enquirer.

> I don't fully understand why packages like this are so popular.

It actually works like this: Author X develops `iseven`, `isodd`, etc. No one really downloads such packages. Author X then develops `importantPackage` which does do something useful developers out here download. Now `iseven`, `isodd` are downloaded alongside `importantPackage`.

My point is, we should recognize certain NPM authors as toxic, but I guess "freedom of speech/code" stops us from doing so. Example of such an author: https://github.com/jonschlinkert/

something like enquirer

You're thinking of Jon Schlinkert, publisher of 1435 packages on npm.

It's insanely funny to me that these packages exist while one of his bigger projects (https://github.com/enquirer/enquirer) lists the following reason under "why use it":

> Lightweight - Only one dependency, the excellent ansi-colors by Brian Woodward.

It's written by this guy, who shits out micro libraries by the hundreds. He moved the project to another user under the pretense that he was learning to program back then, but a lot of his stuff is similarly inconsequential micro libraries.