Skip to content

Piero Bosio Social Web Site Personale Logo Fediverso

Social Forum federato con il resto del mondo. Non contano le istanze, contano le persone

Exciting news for #Fedify developers!

Uncategorized
1 1 12
  • Exciting news for #Fedify developers! We've just landed a major milestone for Fedify 2.0—the #CLI now runs natively on #Node.js and #Bun, not just #Deno (#456). If you install @fedify/cli@2.0.0-dev.1761 from npm, you'll get actual JavaScript that executes directly in your runtime, no more pre-compiled binaries from deno compile. This is part of our broader transition to Optique, a new cross-runtime CLI framework we've developed specifically for Fedify's needs (#374).

    This change means a more natural development experience regardless of your #JavaScript runtime preference. Node.js developers can now run the CLI tools directly through their familiar ecosystem, and the same goes for Bun users. While Fedify 2.0 isn't released yet, we're excited to share this progress with the community—feel free to try out the dev version and let us know how it works for you!

  • hongminhee@hollo.socialundefined hongminhee@hollo.social shared this topic on

Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
  • @chi hello! My guides are specifically about self-hosting with a VPS because an old machine opens up a can of worms for newbies and a VPS is so much easier.

    Sorry I can't be of help but the YunoHost official guides are superb: https://doc.yunohost.org/en/admin/get_started/install_on

    read more

  • @Tutanota yes the article was great EXCEPT for the section on social media that included so many travesties:

    "A promising new contender is W, a 100% European platform (but nothing to do with the EU, as conspiracy theorists have claimed)."

    Where do I start?

    1) W Social is a fork of ATProto (aka Bluesky, something that the writer dismissed).

    2) "Conspiracy Theorists"? Well, Euronews was the first to fact check with the European Commission, which denied any involvement.

    Do better Steve Rose

    read more

  • @_elena Hello Elena! I hope you're doing well.

    I'm looking to self host as well but would like to buy a small server that is easy to set up with Yunohost - I can even buy it physically in Paris. Do you have any recommendations or tutorials?

    VPS prices have risen too much because of the RAM price issue worldwide so I want to save costs by putting the server at home. I use it mainly for streaming videos with jellyfin and storing files.

    Have a wonderful day and thank you for your work!

    read more

  • @Tutanota

    It doesn't mention search engines at all which I consider one of the most invidious big tech tools - tracking, biasing, advertising …

    read more

  • Also I can't but read their URL as

    TCP/IP e-line

    instead of TC Pipeline, but that's probably just me and I don't know if it's intentional.

    read more

  • @Tutanota I think it's great that, finally, privacy oriented alternatives are getting the attention they deserve. But this must become a principle to defend on itself, because it took the tech bros political marriage to Trump in order to change minds. When these tech bros were still large donors to the democratic party, privacy and digital rights were widely derided or even frowned upon. So hopefully we learn from this, and start taking a longer term position on our digital rights.

    read more

  • By the way, if you happen to be and live in , and you're looking into making my joke above a reality, look into the Trans Continental Pipeline

    https://tcpipeline.org/

    that might help you relocate to a safer state.

    (Sadly, and predictably, they're currently swamped with requests.)

    read more

  • When software was fun. I miss the quirky and passionate small software houses and bedroom programmers of the 1980s, who were not yet as glamorous as "studios" or "indies".

    https://unsung.aresluna.org/our-programs-are-fun-to-use

    read more
Post suggeriti
  • 0 Votes
    1 Posts
    12 Views
    It's 2 AM. Something is wrong in production. Users are complaining, but you're not sure what's happening—your only clues are a handful of console.log statements you sprinkled around during development. Half of them say things like “here” or “this works.” The other half dump entire objects that scroll off the screen. Good luck. We've all been there. And yet, setting up “proper” logging often feels like overkill. Traditional logging libraries like winston or Pino come with their own learning curves, configuration formats, and assumptions about how you'll deploy your app. If you're working with edge functions or trying to keep your bundle small, adding a logging library can feel like bringing a sledgehammer to hang a picture frame. I'm a fan of the “just enough” approach—more than raw console.log, but without the weight of a full-blown logging framework. We'll start from console.log(), understand its real limitations (not the exaggerated ones), and work toward a setup that's actually useful. I'll be using LogTape for the examples—it's a zero-dependency logging library that works across Node.js, Deno, Bun, and edge functions, and stays out of your way when you don't need it. Starting with console methods—and where they fall short The console object is JavaScript's great equalizer. It's built-in, it works everywhere, and it requires zero setup. You even get basic severity levels: console.debug(), console.info(), console.warn(), and console.error(). In browser DevTools and some terminal environments, these show up with different colors or icons. console.debug("Connecting to database..."); console.info("Server started on port 3000"); console.warn("Cache miss for user 123"); console.error("Failed to process payment"); For small scripts or quick debugging, this is perfectly fine. But once your application grows beyond a few files, the cracks start to show: No filtering without code changes. Want to hide debug messages in production? You'll need to wrap every console.debug() call in a conditional, or find-and-replace them all. There's no way to say “show me only warnings and above” at runtime. Everything goes to the console. What if you want to write logs to a file? Send errors to Sentry? Stream logs to CloudWatch? You'd have to replace every console.* call with something else—and hope you didn't miss any. No context about where logs come from. When your app has dozens of modules, a log message like “Connection failed” doesn't tell you much. Was it the database? The cache? A third-party API? You end up prefixing every message manually: console.error("[database] Connection failed"). No structured data. Modern log analysis tools work best with structured data (JSON). But console.log("User logged in", { userId: 123 }) just prints User logged in { userId: 123 } as a string—not very useful for querying later. Libraries pollute your logs. If you're using a library that logs with console.*, those messages show up whether you want them or not. And if you're writing a library, your users might not appreciate unsolicited log messages. What you actually need from a logging system Before diving into code, let's think about what would actually solve the problems above. Not a wish list of features, but the practical stuff that makes a difference when you're debugging at 2 AM or trying to understand why requests are slow. Log levels with filtering A logging system should let you categorize messages by severity—trace, debug, info, warning, error, fatal—and then filter them based on what you need. During development, you want to see everything. In production, maybe just warnings and above. The key is being able to change this without touching your code. Categories When your app grows beyond a single file, you need to know where logs are coming from. A good logging system lets you tag logs with categories like ["my-app", "database"] or ["my-app", "auth", "oauth"]. Even better, it lets you set different log levels for different categories—maybe you want debug logs from the database module but only warnings from everything else. Sinks (multiple output destinations) “Sink” is just a fancy word for “where logs go.” You might want logs to go to the console during development, to files in production, and to an external service like Sentry or CloudWatch for errors. A good logging system lets you configure multiple sinks and route different logs to different destinations. Structured logging Instead of logging strings, you log objects with properties. This makes logs machine-readable and queryable: // Instead of this: logger.info("User 123 logged in from 192.168.1.1"); // You do this: logger.info("User logged in", { userId: 123, ip: "192.168.1.1" }); Now you can search for all logs where userId === 123 or filter by IP address. Context for request tracing In a web server, you often want all logs from a single request to share a common identifier (like a request ID). This makes it possible to trace a request's journey through your entire system. Getting started with LogTape There are plenty of logging libraries out there. winston has been around forever and has a plugin for everything. Pino is fast and outputs JSON. bunyan, log4js, signale—the list goes on. So why LogTape? A few reasons stood out to me: Zero dependencies. Not “few dependencies”—actually zero. In an era where a single npm install can pull in hundreds of packages, this matters for security, bundle size, and not having to wonder why your lockfile just changed. Works everywhere. The same code runs on Node.js, Deno, Bun, browsers, and edge functions like Cloudflare Workers. No polyfills, no conditional imports, no “this feature only works on Node.” Doesn't force itself on users. If you're writing a library, you can add logging without your users ever knowing—unless they want to see the logs. This is a surprisingly rare feature. Let's set it up: npm add @logtape/logtape # npm pnpm add @logtape/logtape # pnpm yarn add @logtape/logtape # Yarn deno add jsr:@logtape/logtape # Deno bun add @logtape/logtape # Bun Configuration happens once, at your application's entry point: import { configure, getConsoleSink, getLogger } from "@logtape/logtape"; await configure({ sinks: { console: getConsoleSink(), // Where logs go }, loggers: [ { category: ["my-app"], lowestLevel: "debug", sinks: ["console"] }, // What to log ], }); // Now you can log from anywhere in your app: const logger = getLogger(["my-app", "server"]); logger.info`Server started on port 3000`; logger.debug`Request received: ${{ method: "GET", path: "/api/users" }}`; Notice a few things: Configuration is explicit. You decide where logs go (sinks) and which logs to show (lowestLevel). Categories are hierarchical. The logger ["my-app", "server"] inherits settings from ["my-app"]. Template literals work. You can use backticks for a natural logging syntax. Categories and filtering: Controlling log verbosity Here's a scenario: you're debugging a database issue. You want to see every query, every connection attempt, every retry. But you don't want to wade through thousands of HTTP request logs to find them. Categories let you solve this. Instead of one global log level, you can set different verbosity for different parts of your application. await configure({ sinks: { console: getConsoleSink(), }, loggers: [ { category: ["my-app"], lowestLevel: "info", sinks: ["console"] }, // Default: info and above { category: ["my-app", "database"], lowestLevel: "debug", sinks: ["console"] }, // DB module: show debug too ], }); Now when you log from different parts of your app: // In your database module: const dbLogger = getLogger(["my-app", "database"]); dbLogger.debug`Executing query: ${sql}`; // This shows up // In your HTTP module: const httpLogger = getLogger(["my-app", "http"]); httpLogger.debug`Received request`; // This is filtered out (below "info") httpLogger.info`GET /api/users 200`; // This shows up Controlling third-party library logs If you're using libraries that also use LogTape, you can control their logs separately: await configure({ sinks: { console: getConsoleSink() }, loggers: [ { category: ["my-app"], lowestLevel: "debug", sinks: ["console"] }, // Only show warnings and above from some-library { category: ["some-library"], lowestLevel: "warning", sinks: ["console"] }, ], }); The root logger Sometimes you want a catch-all configuration. The root logger (empty category []) catches everything: await configure({ sinks: { console: getConsoleSink() }, loggers: [ // Catch all logs at info level { category: [], lowestLevel: "info", sinks: ["console"] }, // But show debug for your app { category: ["my-app"], lowestLevel: "debug", sinks: ["console"] }, ], }); Log levels and when to use them LogTape has six log levels. Choosing the right one isn't just about severity—it's about who needs to see the message and when. Level When to use it trace Very detailed diagnostic info. Loop iterations, function entry/exit. Usually only enabled when hunting a specific bug. debug Information useful during development. Variable values, state changes, flow control decisions. info Normal operational messages. “Server started,” “User logged in,” “Job completed.” warning Something unexpected happened, but the app can continue. Deprecated API usage, retry attempts, missing optional config. error Something failed. An operation couldn't complete, but the app is still running. fatal The app is about to crash or is in an unrecoverable state. const logger = getLogger(["my-app"]); logger.trace`Entering processUser function`; logger.debug`Processing user ${{ userId: 123 }}`; logger.info`User successfully created`; logger.warn`Rate limit approaching: ${980}/1000 requests`; logger.error`Failed to save user: ${error.message}`; logger.fatal`Database connection lost, shutting down`; A good rule of thumb: in production, you typically run at info or warning level. During development or when debugging, you drop down to debug or trace. Structured logging: Beyond plain text At some point, you'll want to search your logs. “Show me all errors from the payment service in the last hour.” “Find all requests from user 12345.” “What's the average response time for the /api/users endpoint?” If your logs are plain text strings, these queries are painful. You end up writing regexes, hoping the log format is consistent, and cursing past-you for not thinking ahead. Structured logging means attaching data to your logs as key-value pairs, not just embedding them in strings. This makes logs machine-readable and queryable. LogTape supports two syntaxes for this: Template literals (great for simple messages) const userId = 123; const action = "login"; logger.info`User ${userId} performed ${action}`; Message templates with properties (great for structured data) logger.info("User performed action", { userId: 123, action: "login", ip: "192.168.1.1", timestamp: new Date().toISOString(), }); You can reference properties in your message using placeholders: logger.info("User {userId} logged in from {ip}", { userId: 123, ip: "192.168.1.1", }); // Output: User 123 logged in from 192.168.1.1 Nested property access LogTape supports dot notation and array indexing in placeholders: logger.info("Order {order.id} placed by {order.customer.name}", { order: { id: "ORD-001", customer: { name: "Alice", email: "alice@example.com" }, }, }); logger.info("First item: {items[0].name}", { items: [{ name: "Widget", price: 9.99 }], }); Machine-readable output with JSON Lines For production, you often want logs as JSON (one object per line). LogTape has a built-in formatter for this: import { configure, getConsoleSink, jsonLinesFormatter } from "@logtape/logtape"; await configure({ sinks: { console: getConsoleSink({ formatter: jsonLinesFormatter }), }, loggers: [ { category: [], lowestLevel: "info", sinks: ["console"] }, ], }); Output: {"@timestamp":"2026-01-15T10:30:00.000Z","level":"INFO","message":"User logged in","logger":"my-app","properties":{"userId":123}} Sending logs to different destinations (sinks) So far we've been sending everything to the console. That's fine for development, but in production you'll likely want logs to go elsewhere—or to multiple places at once. Think about it: console output disappears when the process restarts. If your server crashes at 3 AM, you want those logs to be somewhere persistent. And when an error occurs, you might want it to show up in your error tracking service immediately, not just sit in a log file waiting for someone to grep through it. This is where sinks come in. A sink is just a function that receives log records and does something with them. LogTape comes with several built-in sinks, and creating your own is trivial. Console sink The simplest sink—outputs to the console: import { getConsoleSink } from "@logtape/logtape"; const consoleSink = getConsoleSink(); File sink For writing logs to files, install the @logtape/file package: npm add @logtape/file import { getFileSink, getRotatingFileSink } from "@logtape/file"; // Simple file sink const fileSink = getFileSink("app.log"); // Rotating file sink (rotates when file reaches 10MB, keeps 5 old files) const rotatingFileSink = getRotatingFileSink("app.log", { maxSize: 10 * 1024 * 1024, // 10MB maxFiles: 5, }); Why rotating files? Without rotation, your log file grows indefinitely until it fills up the disk. With rotation, old logs are automatically archived and eventually deleted, keeping disk usage under control. This is especially important for long-running servers. External services For production systems, you often want logs to go to specialized services that provide search, alerting, and visualization. LogTape has packages for popular services: // OpenTelemetry (for observability platforms like Jaeger, Honeycomb, Datadog) import { getOpenTelemetrySink } from "@logtape/otel"; // Sentry (for error tracking with stack traces and context) import { getSentrySink } from "@logtape/sentry"; // AWS CloudWatch Logs (for AWS-native log aggregation) import { getCloudWatchLogsSink } from "@logtape/cloudwatch-logs"; The OpenTelemetry sink is particularly useful if you're already using OpenTelemetry for tracing—your logs will automatically correlate with your traces, making debugging distributed systems much easier. Multiple sinks Here's where things get interesting. You can send different logs to different destinations based on their level or category: await configure({ sinks: { console: getConsoleSink(), file: getFileSink("app.log"), errors: getSentrySink(), }, loggers: [ { category: [], lowestLevel: "info", sinks: ["console", "file"] }, // Everything to console + file { category: [], lowestLevel: "error", sinks: ["errors"] }, // Errors also go to Sentry ], }); Notice that a log record can go to multiple sinks. An error log in this configuration goes to the console, the file, and Sentry. This lets you have comprehensive local logs while also getting immediate alerts for critical issues. Custom sinks Sometimes you need to send logs somewhere that doesn't have a pre-built sink. Maybe you have an internal logging service, or you want to send logs to a Slack channel, or store them in a database. A sink is just a function that takes a LogRecord. That's it: import type { Sink } from "@logtape/logtape"; const slackSink: Sink = (record) => { // Only send errors and fatals to Slack if (record.level === "error" || record.level === "fatal") { fetch("https://hooks.slack.com/services/YOUR/WEBHOOK/URL", { method: "POST", headers: { "Content-Type": "application/json" }, body: JSON.stringify({ text: `[${record.level.toUpperCase()}] ${record.message.join("")}`, }), }); } }; The simplicity of sink functions means you can integrate LogTape with virtually any logging backend in just a few lines of code. Request tracing with contexts Here's a scenario you've probably encountered: a user reports an error, you check the logs, and you find a sea of interleaved messages from dozens of concurrent requests. Which log lines belong to the user's request? Good luck figuring that out. This is where request tracing comes in. The idea is simple: assign a unique identifier to each request, and include that identifier in every log message produced while handling that request. Now you can filter your logs by request ID and see exactly what happened, in order, for that specific request. LogTape supports this through contexts—a way to attach properties to log messages without passing them around explicitly. Explicit context The simplest approach is to create a logger with attached properties using .with(): function handleRequest(req: Request) { const requestId = crypto.randomUUID(); const logger = getLogger(["my-app", "http"]).with({ requestId }); logger.info`Request received`; // Includes requestId automatically processRequest(req, logger); logger.info`Request completed`; // Also includes requestId } This works well when you're passing the logger around explicitly. But what about code that's deeper in your call stack? What about code in libraries that don't know about your logger instance? Implicit context This is where implicit contexts shine. Using withContext(), you can set properties that automatically appear in all log messages within a callback—even in nested function calls, async operations, and third-party libraries (as long as they use LogTape). First, enable implicit contexts in your configuration: import { configure, getConsoleSink } from "@logtape/logtape"; import { AsyncLocalStorage } from "node:async_hooks"; await configure({ sinks: { console: getConsoleSink() }, loggers: [ { category: ["my-app"], lowestLevel: "debug", sinks: ["console"] }, ], contextLocalStorage: new AsyncLocalStorage(), }); Then use withContext() in your request handler: import { withContext, getLogger } from "@logtape/logtape"; function handleRequest(req: Request) { const requestId = crypto.randomUUID(); return withContext({ requestId }, async () => { // Every log message in this callback includes requestId—automatically const logger = getLogger(["my-app"]); logger.info`Processing request`; await validateInput(req); // Logs here include requestId await processBusinessLogic(req); // Logs here too await saveToDatabase(req); // And here logger.info`Request complete`; }); } The magic is that validateInput, processBusinessLogic, and saveToDatabase don't need to know anything about the request ID. They just call getLogger() and log normally, and the request ID appears in their logs automatically. This works even across async boundaries—the context follows the execution flow, not the call stack. This is incredibly powerful for debugging. When something goes wrong, you can search for the request ID and see every log message from every module that was involved in handling that request. Framework integrations Setting up request tracing manually can be tedious. LogTape has dedicated packages for popular frameworks that handle this automatically: // Express import { expressLogger } from "@logtape/express"; app.use(expressLogger()); // Fastify import { getLogTapeFastifyLogger } from "@logtape/fastify"; const app = Fastify({ loggerInstance: getLogTapeFastifyLogger() }); // Hono import { honoLogger } from "@logtape/hono"; app.use(honoLogger()); // Koa import { koaLogger } from "@logtape/koa"; app.use(koaLogger()); These middlewares automatically generate request IDs, set up implicit contexts, and log request/response information. You get comprehensive request logging with a single line of code. Using LogTape in libraries vs applications If you've ever used a library that spams your console with unwanted log messages, you know how annoying it can be. And if you've ever tried to add logging to your own library, you've faced a dilemma: should you use console.log() and annoy your users? Require them to install and configure a specific logging library? Or just... not log anything? LogTape solves this with its library-first design. Libraries can add as much logging as they want, and it costs their users nothing unless they explicitly opt in. If you're writing a library The rule is simple: use getLogger() to log, but never call configure(). Configuration is the application's responsibility, not the library's. // my-library/src/database.ts import { getLogger } from "@logtape/logtape"; const logger = getLogger(["my-library", "database"]); export function connect(url: string) { logger.debug`Connecting to ${url}`; // ... connection logic ... logger.info`Connected successfully`; } What happens when someone uses your library? If they haven't configured LogTape, nothing happens. The log calls are essentially no-ops—no output, no errors, no performance impact. Your library works exactly as if the logging code wasn't there. If they have configured LogTape, they get full control. They can see your library's debug logs if they're troubleshooting an issue, or silence them entirely if they're not interested. They decide, not you. This is fundamentally different from using console.log() in a library. With console.log(), your users have no choice—they see your logs whether they want to or not. With LogTape, you give them the power to decide. If you're writing an application You configure LogTape once in your entry point. This single configuration controls logging for your entire application, including any libraries that use LogTape: await configure({ sinks: { console: getConsoleSink() }, loggers: [ { category: ["my-app"], lowestLevel: "debug", sinks: ["console"] }, // Your app: verbose { category: ["my-library"], lowestLevel: "warning", sinks: ["console"] }, // Library: quiet { category: ["noisy-library"], lowestLevel: "fatal", sinks: [] }, // That one library: silent ], }); This separation of concerns—libraries log, applications configure—makes for a much healthier ecosystem. Library authors can add detailed logging for debugging without worrying about annoying their users. Application developers can tune logging to their needs without digging through library code. Migrating from another logger? If your application already uses winston, Pino, or another logging library, you don't have to migrate everything at once. LogTape provides adapters that route LogTape logs to your existing logging setup: import { install } from "@logtape/adaptor-winston"; import winston from "winston"; install(winston.createLogger({ /* your existing config */ })); This is particularly useful when you want to use a library that uses LogTape, but you're not ready to switch your whole application over. The library's logs will flow through your existing winston (or Pino) configuration, and you can migrate gradually if you choose to. Production considerations Development and production have different needs. During development, you want verbose logs, pretty formatting, and immediate feedback. In production, you care about performance, reliability, and not leaking sensitive data. Here are some things to keep in mind. Non-blocking mode By default, logging is synchronous—when you call logger.info(), the message is written to the sink before the function returns. This is fine for development, but in a high-throughput production environment, the I/O overhead of writing every log message can add up. Non-blocking mode buffers log messages and writes them in the background: const consoleSink = getConsoleSink({ nonBlocking: true }); const fileSink = getFileSink("app.log", { nonBlocking: true }); The tradeoff is that logs might be slightly delayed, and if your process crashes, some buffered logs might be lost. But for most production workloads, the performance benefit is worth it. Sensitive data redaction Logs have a way of ending up in unexpected places—log aggregation services, debugging sessions, support tickets. If you're logging request data, user information, or API responses, you might accidentally expose sensitive information like passwords, API keys, or personal data. LogTape's @logtape/redaction package helps you catch these before they become a problem: import { redactByPattern, EMAIL_ADDRESS_PATTERN, CREDIT_CARD_NUMBER_PATTERN, type RedactionPattern, } from "@logtape/redaction"; import { defaultConsoleFormatter, configure, getConsoleSink } from "@logtape/logtape"; const BEARER_TOKEN_PATTERN: RedactionPattern = { pattern: /Bearer [A-Za-z0-9\-._~+\/]+=*/g, replacement: "[REDACTED]", }; const formatter = redactByPattern(defaultConsoleFormatter, [ EMAIL_ADDRESS_PATTERN, CREDIT_CARD_NUMBER_PATTERN, BEARER_TOKEN_PATTERN, ]); await configure({ sinks: { console: getConsoleSink({ formatter }), }, // ... }); With this configuration, email addresses, credit card numbers, and bearer tokens are automatically replaced with [REDACTED] in your log output. The @logtape/redaction package comes with built-in patterns for common sensitive data types, and you can define custom patterns for anything else. It's not foolproof—you should still be mindful of what you log—but it provides a safety net. See the redaction documentation for more patterns and field-based redaction. Edge functions and serverless Edge functions (Cloudflare Workers, Vercel Edge Functions, etc.) have a unique constraint: they can be terminated immediately after returning a response. If you have buffered logs that haven't been flushed yet, they'll be lost. The solution is to explicitly flush logs before returning: import { configure, dispose } from "@logtape/logtape"; export default { async fetch(request, env, ctx) { await configure({ /* ... */ }); // ... handle request ... ctx.waitUntil(dispose()); // Flush logs before worker terminates return new Response("OK"); }, }; The dispose() function flushes all buffered logs and cleans up resources. By passing it to ctx.waitUntil(), you ensure the worker stays alive long enough to finish writing logs, even after the response has been sent. Wrapping up Logging isn't glamorous, but it's one of those things that makes a huge difference when something goes wrong. The setup I've described here—categories for organization, structured data for queryability, contexts for request tracing—isn't complicated, but it's a significant step up from scattered console.log statements. LogTape isn't the only way to achieve this, but I've found it hits a nice sweet spot: powerful enough for production use, simple enough that you're not fighting the framework, and light enough that you don't feel guilty adding it to a library. If you want to dig deeper, the LogTape documentation covers advanced topics like custom filters, the “fingers crossed” pattern for buffering debug logs until an error occurs, and more sink options. The GitHub repository is also a good place to report issues or see what's coming next. Now go add some proper logging to that side project you've been meaning to clean up. Your future 2 AM self will thank you.
  • 0 Votes
    5 Posts
    13 Views
    @bgl@hackers.pub 흠, 생각해 보니 그렇네요. 근데 그렇게 가다 보면 LangGraph나 Mastra 같은 것에 가까워 지는 것 같기도 하고요…? 🤔
  • 0 Votes
    1 Posts
    8 Views
    If you've built CLI tools, you've written code like this: if (opts.reporter === "junit" && !opts.outputFile) { throw new Error("--output-file is required for junit reporter"); } if (opts.reporter === "html" && !opts.outputFile) { throw new Error("--output-file is required for html reporter"); } if (opts.reporter === "console" && opts.outputFile) { console.warn("--output-file is ignored for console reporter"); } A few months ago, I wrote Stop writing CLI validation. Parse it right the first time. about parsing individual option values correctly. But it didn't cover the relationships between options. In the code above, --output-file only makes sense when --reporter is junit or html. When it's console, the option shouldn't exist at all. We're using TypeScript. We have a powerful type system. And yet, here we are, writing runtime checks that the compiler can't help with. Every time we add a new reporter type, we need to remember to update these checks. Every time we refactor, we hope we didn't miss one. The state of TypeScript CLI parsers The old guard—Commander, yargs, minimist—were built before TypeScript became mainstream. They give you bags of strings and leave type safety as an exercise for the reader. But we've made progress. Modern TypeScript-first libraries like cmd-ts and Clipanion (the library powering Yarn Berry) take types seriously: // cmd-ts const app = command({ args: { reporter: option({ type: string, long: 'reporter' }), outputFile: option({ type: string, long: 'output-file' }), }, handler: (args) => { // args.reporter: string // args.outputFile: string }, }); // Clipanion class TestCommand extends Command { reporter = Option.String('--reporter'); outputFile = Option.String('--output-file'); } These libraries infer types for individual options. --port is a number. --verbose is a boolean. That's real progress. But here's what they can't do: express that --output-file is required when --reporter is junit, and forbidden when --reporter is console. The relationship between options isn't captured in the type system. So you end up writing validation code anyway: handler: (args) => { // Both cmd-ts and Clipanion need this if (args.reporter === "junit" && !args.outputFile) { throw new Error("--output-file required for junit"); } // args.outputFile is still string | undefined // TypeScript doesn't know it's definitely string when reporter is "junit" } Rust's clap and Python's Click have requires and conflicts_with attributes, but those are runtime checks too. They don't change the result type. If the parser configuration knows about option relationships, why doesn't that knowledge show up in the result type? Modeling relationships with conditional() Optique treats option relationships as a first-class concept. Here's the test reporter scenario: import { conditional, object } from "@optique/core/constructs"; import { option } from "@optique/core/primitives"; import { choice, string } from "@optique/core/valueparser"; import { run } from "@optique/run"; const parser = conditional( option("--reporter", choice(["console", "junit", "html"])), { console: object({}), junit: object({ outputFile: option("--output-file", string()), }), html: object({ outputFile: option("--output-file", string()), openBrowser: option("--open-browser"), }), } ); const [reporter, config] = run(parser); The conditional() combinator takes a discriminator option (--reporter) and a map of branches. Each branch defines what other options are valid for that discriminator value. TypeScript infers the result type automatically: type Result = | ["console", {}] | ["junit", { outputFile: string }] | ["html", { outputFile: string; openBrowser: boolean }]; When reporter is "junit", outputFile is string—not string | undefined. The relationship is encoded in the type. Now your business logic gets real type safety: const [reporter, config] = run(parser); switch (reporter) { case "console": runWithConsoleOutput(); break; case "junit": // TypeScript knows config.outputFile is string writeJUnitReport(config.outputFile); break; case "html": // TypeScript knows config.outputFile and config.openBrowser exist writeHtmlReport(config.outputFile); if (config.openBrowser) openInBrowser(config.outputFile); break; } No validation code. No runtime checks. If you add a new reporter type and forget to handle it in the switch, the compiler tells you. A more complex example: database connections Test reporters are a nice example, but let's try something with more variation. Database connection strings: myapp --db=sqlite --file=./data.db myapp --db=postgres --host=localhost --port=5432 --user=admin myapp --db=mysql --host=localhost --port=3306 --user=root --ssl Each database type needs completely different options: SQLite just needs a file path PostgreSQL needs host, port, user, and optionally password MySQL needs host, port, user, and has an SSL flag Here's how you model this: import { conditional, object } from "@optique/core/constructs"; import { withDefault, optional } from "@optique/core/modifiers"; import { option } from "@optique/core/primitives"; import { choice, string, integer } from "@optique/core/valueparser"; const dbParser = conditional( option("--db", choice(["sqlite", "postgres", "mysql"])), { sqlite: object({ file: option("--file", string()), }), postgres: object({ host: option("--host", string()), port: withDefault(option("--port", integer()), 5432), user: option("--user", string()), password: optional(option("--password", string())), }), mysql: object({ host: option("--host", string()), port: withDefault(option("--port", integer()), 3306), user: option("--user", string()), ssl: option("--ssl"), }), } ); The inferred type: type DbConfig = | ["sqlite", { file: string }] | ["postgres", { host: string; port: number; user: string; password?: string }] | ["mysql", { host: string; port: number; user: string; ssl: boolean }]; Notice the details: PostgreSQL defaults to port 5432, MySQL to 3306. PostgreSQL has an optional password, MySQL has an SSL flag. Each database type has exactly the options it needs—no more, no less. With this structure, writing dbConfig.ssl when the mode is sqlite isn't a runtime error—it's a compile-time impossibility. Try expressing this with requires_if attributes. You can't. The relationships are too rich. The pattern is everywhere Once you see it, you find this pattern in many CLI tools: Authentication modes: const authParser = conditional( option("--auth", choice(["none", "basic", "token", "oauth"])), { none: object({}), basic: object({ username: option("--username", string()), password: option("--password", string()), }), token: object({ token: option("--token", string()), }), oauth: object({ clientId: option("--client-id", string()), clientSecret: option("--client-secret", string()), tokenUrl: option("--token-url", url()), }), } ); Deployment targets, output formats, connection protocols—anywhere you have a mode selector that determines what other options are valid. Why conditional() exists Optique already has an or() combinator for mutually exclusive alternatives. Why do we need conditional()? The or() combinator distinguishes branches based on structure—which options are present. It works well for subcommands like git commit vs git push, where the arguments differ completely. But in the reporter example, the structure is identical: every branch has a --reporter flag. The difference lies in the flag's value, not its presence. // This won't work as intended const parser = or( object({ reporter: option("--reporter", choice(["console"])) }), object({ reporter: option("--reporter", choice(["junit", "html"])), outputFile: option("--output-file", string()) }), ); When you pass --reporter junit, or() tries to pick a branch based on what options are present. Both branches have --reporter, so it can't distinguish them structurally. conditional() solves this by reading the discriminator's value first, then selecting the appropriate branch. It bridges the gap between structural parsing and value-based decisions. The structure is the constraint Instead of parsing options into a loose type and then validating relationships, define a parser whose structure is the constraint. Traditional approach Optique approach Parse → Validate → Use Parse (with constraints) → Use Types and validation logic maintained separately Types reflect the constraints Mismatches found at runtime Mismatches found at compile time The parser definition becomes the single source of truth. Add a new reporter type? The parser definition changes, the inferred type changes, and the compiler shows you everywhere that needs updating. Try it If this resonates with a CLI you're building: Documentation Tutorial conditional() reference GitHub Next time you're about to write an if statement checking option relationships, ask: could the parser express this constraint instead? The structure of your parser is the constraint. You might not need that validation code at all.
  • It's alive!

    Fediverso nextjs fedify fediverse
    1
    1
    0 Votes
    1 Posts
    11 Views
    It's alive! 🧟After a bit of trial-error, got fediverse comments showing on a #nextjs site running #fedify. My personal fediverse-connected youtube mirror is now mostly feature complete. (The video post in the screenshot is over here: https://watch.hayes.software/video/16)#fediverse