- proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li VS nodejs-polars
- proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li VS WebGL-Fluid-Simulation
- proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li VS proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-list
- proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li VS arquero
- proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li VS uint8array-extras
- proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li VS proposal-async-iterator-helpers
- proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li VS proposal-array-from-async
- proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li VS streams
Proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li Alternatives
Similar projects and alternatives to proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li
-
-
InfluxDB
Power Real-Time Data Analytics at Scale. Get real-time insights from all types of time series data with InfluxDB. Ingest, query, and analyze billions of data points in real-time with unbounded cardinality.
-
-
-
-
SaaSHub
SaaSHub - Software Alternatives and Reviews. SaaSHub helps you find the best software and product alternatives
-
-
-
-
NOTE:
The number of mentions on this list indicates mentions on common posts plus user suggested alternatives.
Hence, a higher number means a better proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li alternative or higher similarity.
proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li reviews and mentions
Posts with mentions or reviews of proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li.
We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives
and similar projects. The last one was on 2023-10-24.
-
Goodbye, Node.js Buffer
Yeah, in your case I think most of the complexity is actually on the ReadableStream side, not the base64 side.
The thing that I'd actually want for your case is either a TransformStream for byte stream <-> base64 stream (which I expect will come eventually, once the simple case gets done), or something which would let you read the entire stream into Uint8Array or ArrayBuffer, which is a long-standing suggestion [1].
---
> Why does de-chunking a byte array need to be complicated
Keep in mind the concat proposal is _very_ early. If you think it would be useful to be able to concat Uint8Arrays and have that implicitly concatenate the underlying buffers, [2] is the place to open an issue.
---
> You have made me realize I don't even know what the right venue is to vote on stuff. How should I signal to TC39 that e.g. Array.fromAsync is a good idea?
Unfortunately, it's different places for different things. Streams are not TC39 at all; the right place for suggestions there is in the WHATWG streams repo [3]. Usually there's already an existing issue and you can add your use case as a comment in the relevant issue. TC39 proposals all have their own Github repositories, and you can open a new issue with your use case.
Concrete use cases are much more helpful than just "this is a good idea". Though `fromAsync` in particular everyone agrees is good, and it mostly just needs implementations, which are ongoing; see e.g. [4]. If you _really_ want to advance a stage 3 proposal, you can contribute a PR to Chrome or Firefox with an implementation - but for nontrivial proposals that's usually hard. For TC39 in particular, use cases are only really valuable pre-stage-3 proposals.
[1] https://github.com/whatwg/streams/issues/1019
[2] https://github.com/jasnell/proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li...
[3] https://github.com/whatwg/streams
[4] https://bugs.chromium.org/p/v8/issues/detail?id=13321
Stats
Basic proposal-zero-copy-arraybuffer-li repo stats
2
-
-
-
Popular Comparisons
Sponsored
SaaSHub - Software Alternatives and Reviews
SaaSHub helps you find the best software and product alternatives
www.saashub.com