Skip to content
DevMeme
318 of 7590
PackageManagement Post #376 · source on Telegram

The Proliferation of Standards: An EventEmitter Saga

Description

This image is a collage of screenshots from a package registry, likely npm, illustrating the humorous and frustrating cycle of competing standards in software development. It shows a chronological progression of libraries named 'EventEmitter3' through 'EventEmitter7'. Each new version's description is a commentary on the previous ones. 'EventEmitter4' justifies its existence because 'EventEmitter3' lacks a specific function. 'EventEmitter5' is a noble attempt to 'end the insanity' and unify the predecessors. 'EventEmitter6' satirically embraces the chaos, listing the previous five as dependencies. Finally, 'EventEmitter7' descends into meta-humor with the phrase 'We need to go deeper'. This sequence perfectly mirrors the famous XKCD comic about standards, where an attempt to create one universal standard results in yet another competing one. It resonates deeply with experienced developers who have seen this pattern with countless libraries and frameworks, leading to fragmentation and dependency hell

Comments

8
Anonymous ★ Top Pick This is why `node_modules` has its own gravitational pull. It's powered by the infinite energy of developers trying to 'fix' the previous version
  1. Anonymous ★ Top Pick

    This is why `node_modules` has its own gravitational pull. It's powered by the infinite energy of developers trying to 'fix' the previous version

  2. Anonymous

    EventEmitter3→4→5→6: every fork deletes one line, adds one dependency, and ships a README explaining why the last maintainer was an idiot - micro-innovation at 50 MB per `npm install`

  3. Anonymous

    The best part about EventEmitter7 is that it's actually just EventEmitter3 with a webpack config that bundles all the previous versions as peer dependencies, because nothing says 'architectural maturity' quite like solving package proliferation by creating a meta-package that depends on the entire genealogy of packages it was meant to replace

  4. Anonymous

    eventemitter6 depending on eventemitter1-5 is the most honest package on npm: it's the only one that admits the insanity is load-bearing

  5. Anonymous

    Ah yes, the classic JavaScript ecosystem move: when you can't agree on an API, just publish EventEmitter(n+1). By EventEmitter6, they're literally promising to 'make EventEmitter great again' and make 'listeners pay for it' - a beautiful meta-commentary on how we've collectively created a dependency hell where five different implementations of the observer pattern can't coexist peacefully. The real kicker? EventEmitter7's 'we need to go deeper' suggests this recursion has no base case. At this rate, we'll hit EventEmitter.MAX_SAFE_INTEGER before anyone considers that maybe, just maybe, we should have standardized this in the language itself

  6. Anonymous

    When “make EventEmitter great again” depends on 1 - 5, the bus isn’t emitting events - it’s emitting SBOM entries

  7. Anonymous

    EventEmitter N+1: Fixing the fixes from N, ensuring your lockfile emits eternal chaos

  8. Anonymous

    npm’s semver hack: just rename the package. EventEmitter3→4→5→6→7 - now the only event that fires is 'fork', propagating through an O(N) dependency chain and leaking maintainers instead of memory

Use J and K for navigation