On: You might not need jQuery (2014)

[krapp]

no no no... what we need to do is break them down so that each line is a separate library composed of a single function with its own independent dependency tree and test suite, then build another library out of that, all written in a language that compiles to javascript, and publish it to a proprietary package manager.

If we're really clever we can probably get it up to several megabytes, require three languages and have it run from an embedded C compiler written in Webassembly.

Of course, it will only work in Chrome but really who wants to waste time testing in browsers nobody even uses amirite?

[quickthrower2 → krapp]

Then i would only consider it if it has an @types package I can pull

[emptyparadise → krapp]

Code golf, except it's maximizing potential security issues.

[6510 → krapp]

I like the functions (that were suppose to do things) calling functions suffering from the same issue.

We're not in kansas anymore.