←back to thread

71 points zobweyt | 6 comments | | HN request time: 0.425s | source | bottom
1. kianN ◴[] No.43552930[source]
My favorite part of this library is that it seems to have zero dependencies!

Python packages seem to often rope in a surprising number of dependencies for relatively limited libraries.

I can easily imagine pulling this package into my work: thank you for keeping the requirements to a minimum!

replies(2): >>43552964 #>>43554200 #
2. zobweyt ◴[] No.43552964[source]
Thanks for the kind words!

This library actually has zero dependencies! I'm glad you appreciate the no-dependency design.

It's great to hear that it fits well with your work!

replies(1): >>43553104 #
3. esafak ◴[] No.43553104[source]
Is there a GH badge for the dependency count? Depfu maybe. Someone should make one if not; it's worth advertising.
replies(1): >>43553187 #
4. zobweyt ◴[] No.43553187{3}[source]
Thanks for the suggestion!

Right now, there's no such GH badge. Since the project will always have zero dependencies, I think we can simply use a static badge like this:

https://img.shields.io/badge/dependencies-0-green

5. danpalmer ◴[] No.43554200[source]
Definitely something to be championed, although I suspect this is a matter of perspective. I find Python packages to have refreshingly few dependencies compared to packages in the JS ecosystem, although compared to the Swift ecosystem which I’m somewhat familiar with, they do tend to have a few more.
replies(1): >>43554266 #
6. zobweyt ◴[] No.43554266[source]
I appreciate your perspective! It's interesting to consider how the built-in libraries of a language can influence its ecosystem. Python does have a rich standard library that often reduces the need for external dependencies. In contrast, JavaScript's ecosystem has evolved around web development, where modularity and flexibility are prioritized, leading to a proliferation of packages.