logoalt Hacker News

bel8today at 6:49 AM6 repliesview on HN

I'm happy for competition in this space, specially because Deno can run true TypeScript directly and not just strip types like the current Node implementation.

With that said, this is going to eat a lot of Tauri market. Why would I use Tauri now? The 150mb of additional bundle size is just an extra 1 to 10 seconds of download time in most internet connections and you get a reliable rendering engine.


Replies

flohofwoetoday at 7:29 AM

Deno also just strips the type annotations when running TS code - at least by default. To get type checking you'll need to run via `deno run --check`, or use the separate `deno check` subcommand. No big deal since type checking and linting usually happens automatically in the IDE during development.

show 1 reply
aabhaytoday at 7:48 AM

Tauri doesn't lock you in to one JS ecosystem. In fact, it doesn't require you to use javascript at all.

Also, we've had several developer framework startups get acquired -- Astro, Nuxt, UV, Bun, Vite. It doesn't exactly inspire confidence in a software that you want to last and give support for years.

jpace121today at 7:11 AM

> Why would I use Tauri now?

You’re “backend” isn’t JavaScript.

swiftcodertoday at 7:10 AM

> and you get a reliable rendering engine

How is it more reliable than Tauri - aren't they both using the system webview?

show 2 replies
SpaghettiXtoday at 9:40 AM

But that would be the same argument for using electron? Why use this and not electron?