workload-discovery-on-aws VS GoJS, a JavaScript Library for HTML Diagrams

Workload Discovery on AWS has recently released a new version - would that work for you?

AWS has a solution called AWS Perspective that will do exactly this. The solution itself is free and open source, you only pay for the resources it creates. You can also export the diagrams to draw.io if you want to edit them manually. Also, it will show you how much your solution(s) and each of its components is costing you.

Check out - https://aws.amazon.com/solutions/implementations/aws-perspective/

My library (https://gojs.net) can do that easily. Give it a look, and if you think the price is acceptable for your project, contact us and we can make you a proof-of-concept.

If you click on their username, it takes you to their profile.

https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=simonsarris

which says:

I make GoJS, a powerful canvas-based diagramming library:

http://gojs.net/

Have spent six figures yearly on ads, mostly for reach for the developer-focused diagram library GoJS (https://gojs.net)

> Each experiment will need ~$500 and 2 weeks

I would add a zero if you want serious data. I would also double the timescale. $5,000 over 4 weeks

I second the uselessness of Google Display, it might look like conversions numbers are good but they are 100% too good to be true. As soon as you look into them you find the sources are things like "ad from HappyFunBabyTime Android app". You have to ruthlessly prune daily for months to get anything real, and even then I'm skeptical of value. For a developer tool with very strict conversion metrics!

But I disagree on Google Search:

> Good for conversion, bad for awareness.

Before we were popular it was excellent for awareness. Post popularity its much more arguable.

Creating the Halogen components would be simple enough if one takes inspiration from gojs-react. The issue is that there are no PureScript bindings for the GoJS types themselves, but GoJS does provide .ts.d declarations, which means I could use purescript-read-dts, but that library's maturity/usability seems somewhat ambiguous, according to an author's post from 3 years ago.

used goJS in one project and konva in another

I built GoJS, which is one of the most popular commercial JS diagramming libraries: https://gojs.net

I built carefulwords, a very fast thesaurus and quote site for inspiration, used by... tens of people a day. Eg: https://carefulwords.com/gift https://carefulwords.com/solitude

I mostly made it for myself, me and my wife use it all the time. I am slowly editing down the thesaurus to managable size.

I built a 12x16 "Goose Palace" barn out of local pine timbers, which taught me timber framing, and taught my tiny baby who turned 2 years old while doing it that this is just the kind of thing that people normally do, build barns in their driveway. Some context: https://simonsarris.substack.com/p/the-goose-palace

Some photos of building it with the baby: https://twitter.com/simonsarris/status/1584169368203956225

I designed my house, and have been writing extensively about that. Maybe this is the most impactful, since photos of it are all over Pinterest and other sites, now. The first post on that: https://simonsarris.substack.com/p/designing-a-new-old-home-...

I am not sure what is most impactful. Maybe ultimately it is building my family.

I made a pull request for GoJS (https://gojs.net)

I have been building this canvas-based graphing library since 2011, and it contains a good number of features around customization and interactivity that are not found in other libraries. It is commercial for non-academic use however.

in one project we use konva, in another we used gojs. Any of them or some other library needs some training and introduce own limitations but it still way way way better than handing all the coordinates, calculations, routing etc on your own.

I am really surprised by this guy's opinion. I make GoJS (https://gojs.net/), a diagramming library written in TypeScript. The project began in 2011 and we converted it to TS in 2018. It's been a huge plus. The sole downside was the initial time it took during conversion, but even in doing so we caught bugs with incorrect input types, documentation mistakes, etc.

On our end, it enforces type safety better than the Google Closure Compiler. There has scarcely been a problem with type complexity that was not ultimately our fault. Just a couple minor things that TS amended later. For that matter the TS experience has only gotten better, generally.

On our users end, we can now give them a .d.ts file that's much richer and easier for us to produce to aid their autocompletion. And we can use that .d.ts file to ensure that all the methods we intended to expose/minify are getting exposed. The advantages with the .d.ts and documentation make it feel almost essential to me for library developers to consider TS.

TypeScript has only made debugging easier, much easier since it catches errors at time of typing unlike the closure compiler. The sole exception is that debugging is a bit slower since I have to transpile instead of just refreshing the browser. But I have tsc set to compile a relatively unminified version of the JS. But if the slowness gets to me, I can just edit the JS output until I solve the issue, and then carry those edits over to the TS. This has never felt like a problem, though maybe his library is significantly more complicated.

Feel free to ask me anything if you have questions about library design + TS.

GoJS might work for you: https://gojs.net

Although the focus of the library is interactivity and not setting up sequences of animation, but that is possible too.