►
From YouTube: Node.js Tooling Group Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
It's
working,
alright,
so
looks
like
all
right
looks
like
we're
live
okay,
so
hi
welcome
to
the
node.js
tooling
group
meeting.
A
B
Do
you
think
right
so
yeah,
like
I
mentioned
to
you
earlier,
it's
been
a
rough
couple
of
months
for
me
in
terms
of
getting
things
outside
of
my
personal
I
have
done
so
no
I
have
not
had
a
chance
to
really
take
any
look
at
that.
However,
I
was
just
looking
at
the
threat
this
morning
and
it
looks
like
there
was
some
discussion
you
know
with
with
Sam
Roberts
about
maybe
just
sort
of
taking
in
Isaac's
room
wrath
module.
Oh,
that
seems
like
a
pretty
compelling
idea.
I
mean
there's.
B
B
So,
just
basically
not
supporting
gloves
and
only
supporting,
like
you
know,
real
paths
that
that
should
work
just
fine,
so
yeah
we
wouldn't
be
able
to
take
it
as
is,
but
we
should
be
able
to
massage
it
into
something
that
is
acceptable
as
a
thing
inside
no
dress.
Let
that
mean
somebody
can
be
done.
B
A
A
In
your
mind,
then
so
whatever
I
I,
don't
remember
what
what
Sam
said.
Only
what
what
he
told
me,
otherwise,
which
was
something
about
some
stuff
about
seed
that
I
don't
understand
essentially
and
so
he's
just
yeah.
Let's
go
ahead
and
you
might
be
just
just
better
off
doing
in
JavaScript
and
sounds
like
that
sounds
good.
I.
Think
that
sounds
good
to
me,
too
I
mean
yeah.
I
could
summarize
that
real
quick,
if
that's.
B
So
basically,
Rafael
was
bringing
forward
a
function
provided
in
C++
seventeen
that
would
basically
do
most
of
the
work
for
us.
The
problem
with
that
is,
that's
C++.
Seventeen
isn't
available
on
all
of
nodes
target
platforms
as
I
understand
the
first
thing
so
basically
we'd
be
using.
You
know
some
older
methods
in
C++
now
the
problem
with
that
again
and
is
that
we
may
not
get
any
performance
benefit
of
doing
that
versus
doing
it
ourselves
in
JavaScript,
based
on
what
the
implementation
happens
to
be
in
some
C++,
it
could
be
platform
dependent.
B
B
A
Okay,
thank
you
all
right,
so
this
might
be
a
shorter
meeting,
so
I
don't
think.
There's
anything.
Is
there
anything
on
the
on
the
user?
Land
shims
happening.
A
I
know
that
okay,
so
first
is
there
anything
that
needs
a
shim
that
we
should
worry
about
off
the
top
of
off
the
top
of
anybody's
head
I'm
sure
there
are
just
kind
of
question
of
you
know:
how
important
is
it,
but
anything
coming
down.
The
pipe
you
know
is
is
a
is
a
worker
thread
shim
that
actually
just
uses
like
cluster
or
child
processes?
Is
that
worth
doing
you
know?
Does
anybody
have
anything
else
that
they
that
they
know
of.
A
So
yeah
I
do
know
that
the
project
seemed
to
be
kind
of
hung
up
on
this
whole
idea
around
namespacing
stuff,
and
it
would
be
really
good
to
get
that
sorted
out,
but
that
doesn't
mean
that
we
are
blocked
on
it.
If
there's
any
feature,
that's
coming
out,
I
think
you
know
what,
if
we
use
the
same,
if
we
use
roughly
the
same
API
that
RIM
RAF
provides,
for
example,.
C
C
A
A
A
A
Oh
there,
it
is
okay,
so
I
just
put
the
link
to
the
issue
in
the
chat,
so
I
wanted
to
start
thinking
about
about
argument.
Person
I
think
we've
made
noises
about
it
before.
A
The
I
guess
the
main
idea
is
that
there
really
is
nothing
in
node
and
if
you
want
to
look
at
the
arguments,
you
are
stuck
using
process,
art,
v,
slice
to
essentially
and
then
iterating
over
that
array
and,
however,
you
see
fit
so
you
know
other
similar
technologies
to
node.
Have
some
built-in
stuff
I,
don't
know
how
prevalent
it
is.
I
do
know
that
you
know
Python
we
used
to
have
I,
guess
its
deprecated
opt
parse
and
then
eventually
argh
parse
I.
Think
is
the
thing.
That
is
the
thing
now.
B
A
In
this
issue
I
mentioned,
you
know
there
are
a
million
different
ways
to
do
it.
There's
a
lot
of
different.
You
know
strategies
as
far
as
what
certain
things
look
like
you
know
what
happens
when
an
option
has
an
option.
How
do
you
format
different
types
of
things?
How
much
do
we
have
to
worry
about?
Everybody
has
an
idea
about
how
they
want
to
do
it,
and
there
are
certain
conventions
that
are
more.
You
know
present
in
one
place
versus
the
other,
and
so
you
know
whatever
we
come
up
with.
A
You
know
it's
my
hope
that
if
you,
for
instance,
if
there's
somebody
in
in
core
or
a
collaborator
or
somebody
looking
at
this
code
and
they're
like
you
know,
I,
don't
like
that,
you
know.
Hopefully
they
would
say.
Well,
you
know
yes,
but
I,
don't
really
need
to
use
it.
You
know,
and
nobody
really
needs
to
use
it.
You
can
use
it
if
you
want,
but
we're
just
not
gonna
make
everybody
happy
here.
A
A
A
You
know
with
with
keys
for
the
the
argument,
names
and
the
values
and
such,
and
it
doesn't
do
all
these
fancy
things
like
help.
Output,
for
example,
that
yards
does
at
first.
I
was
thinking.
Well,
you
know
we
don't
want
to
be
in
the
business
of
generating
help
output.
That
seems
ridiculous
and
then
the
more
I
thought
about
it.
A
The
more
I
was
like
well,
who
writes
a
command
line,
app
that
takes
arguments
that
doesn't
want
some
sort
of
help
output
and
while
it
seems
like
maybe
I,
don't
know,
it
just
seems
like
it's
half
an
implementation
without
without
taking
those
argument,
definitions
and
in
providing
some
sort
of
help
output.
But
you
know,
obviously
that's
why
I'm
bringing
it
to
the
group
I
want
to
don't
want
to
talk
about
it
and
discuss
so
and
there's
some
questions
about
naming.
But
what
do
you
all
think
here
on
the
call?
A
A
C
Right
right,
there
may
be
some
kind
of
like
middle
ground
like
rather
than
rather
than
providing
a
full
implementation
like
commander
or
something
like
that.
Could
we
just
provide
some
low-level
pieces
that
a
library
like
yards
or
commander
could
take
advantage
of,
or
people
could
also
use
themselves
when
building
command
line
tools,
something
better
than
just
processed
dark,
V,
dot,
slice,
yeah.
A
I
mean
I
feel
like
at
minimum.
That's
what
we
need
is,
please,
you
know,
don't
don't
make
me
do
this
myself,
take
take
the
arguments
and
give
me
like
you
know,
keys
and
values,
because
that's
what
I
need
and
that's
what
everybody
needs
when
they
parson
arguments
so
I
feel
like
that's
the
absolute
bare
minimum,
and
maybe
that's
what
we
should
shoot
for.
It's
just
that.
You
know.
A
Yes,
I,
agree
that
everybody
has
different
ideas
about
what
help
output
should
look
like
how
things
should
be
formatted,
but
you're
still
gonna
need
it,
and
so
that's
why
I
feel
like
we
should
really
consider
it.
I
again,
you
know
I
feel
like
that's
kind
of
a
tall
order,
because
it's
simply
just
the
culture
around
node
in
node,
core
and
I
I
can
see
that
getting
a
lot
of
pushback
as.
A
B
B
B
Do
read
me
for
minimis
right
now,
and
you
know
it
gives
us
a
nice
object
full
of
all
the
parameters
provided
and
it
preserves
ordering
as
well,
because
yeh
JavaScript
today
preserves
ordering
an
object.
So
that's
cool,
so
I
mean
yeah.
We
get,
we
get
a
lot
of
the
way.
There
was
something
like
minimis.
A
A
As
far
as
I
know,
we
don't
have
things
in
node
that
do
you
know,
essentially
print
columns
and
stuff
in
in
in
you
know,
on
the
command
line.
So
if
you're
gonna
have
help
out,
but
it's
going
to
be
formatted,
and
you
know
it's
going
to
have
sections
and
indents
and
and
justification,
and
all
that
and
there's
nothing
in
node
to
do
that
and
so
yeah.
B
A
B
C
It
was
also
usable
on
its
own,
like
I,
agree
that
it
makes
sense
that
we
want
to
provide
something
that
a
library
could
take
advantage
of,
but
it
would
also
be
nice
if
it
was
useful
enough
that
I
could
use
it
on
its
own,
like
if
I
was
making
a
simple
script
that
took
one
or
two
arguments.
It'd
be
great.
If
I
could
just
use
these
built-in
methods,
rather
than
I'm
going
to
pull
in
an
entire
library,
yeah.
A
A
A
A
That's
probably
gonna
be
where
it's
gonna
have
to
happen,
but
yeah
I
think
it's
a
at
one
of
those
things
where
it's
certainly,
if
anybody
has
suggestions
on
what
it
should
look
like,
that
would
be
awesome,
but
I
I
feel
like
it's
one
of
those
things
that
people
aren't
gonna
be
entirely
sure
about
until
they
actually
like,
have
it
in
front
of
them.
That's
why
I
was
like
well,
we
should
just
start
building
stuff
and
play
with
it
kind
of
I.
A
Think
it's
just
really
to
draw
the
lines
around
this
and
say
this
is
this:
is
the
scope
and-
and
we
want
to-
we
don't
want
to
go
beyond
this.
This
particular
scope-
and
this
is
why
you
know
if
we're
gonna
draw
the
lines,
and
we
should
we
need
to
be
able
to
explain
this
is
this
is
why
we're
drawing
the
line
where
we're
drawing
it,
and
you
know
that
I
think
that'll,
be
good.
It'll,
certainly
be
easier
to
argue
our
case
for
adding
something
like
this.
A
Also
naming
it
might
be
tough
and
so
yeah,
it's
and
I
think
this
is
the
problem
with
the
name
space
stuff.
Is
that
if
I
want
to
add
a
new
module
denote
core?
Well?
Is
that
gonna
conflict
with
a
user
land
module?
And
the
answer
is
generally
yes,
so
you
know
what
do
we
call
this
new
thing?
How
do
we
approach
that?
A
So
I
don't
know
what
the
most
recent
what's
the
most
recent
built-in
module
that
was
added
was
it
was
a
workers
workers
herds,
but
it's
I
would
like
to
kind
of
go
back
and
take
a
look
and
see
if
there
were
any
concerns
around
that
and
like
what
the
current
state
of
adding
new
built-ins
to
node
looks
like
because
I
would
hate
to
get
blocked
or
tripped
up.
Just
just
because
of
an
issue
like
that,
where
it's
not
so
much
about
the
implementation.
A
A
A
A
So
I
have
talked
you
know.
I've
kicked
this
idea
around
with
him
a
little
bit.
He
said
you
know
something
like
yds
parser,
which
seems
like
what
I
would
expect
him
to
say
so
yeah,
but
no
I
I
do
really
want
what
Ben
to
chime
in
on
this.
For
sure-
and
you
know-
maybe
he
wants
to
implement
it-
maybe
not
I,
don't
know,
he's
I
think
he's
still
kind
of
working
on
his
good
coverage
and
he
probably
wants
to
get
into
source
maps
and
stuff
like
that.