HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
nodejs
node
JavaScript2014–2026
nodejs / node

node

Node.js JavaScript runtime ✨🐢🚀✨

Web DevelopmentSystems & InfrastructureLanguages & CompilersMobile & Desktop
Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
376Distinct people
482Mentions
1Explicit recommenders
123.6KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Node.js JavaScript runtime ✨🐢🚀✨

GitHub

Where it is used

  • weather.com — weather.com uses Node.js to power its website. This is the runtime behind their public weather.com site. Source

What people are saying

Expect a blog post shortly, but from v8 we get these language changes: - await/async behind flag (already covered in thread) - Exponentiation operator: > console.log(60**2*24);…

jbergstroem used a recommendation phrase. One indexed comment matches. This is a phrase match, not a verdict.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

Mentioned in the same Hacker News threads. That is not proof they are substitutes.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 6:01:08 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year482 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2014-11-28 03:40:25 UTC to 2026-11-01 13:22:11 UTC.

0204060801002014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 14 mentions; 3 submissions, 11 comments20142015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 96 mentions; 41 submissions, 55 comments2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 68 mentions; 23 submissions, 45 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 66 mentions; 25 submissions, 41 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 31 mentions; 10 submissions, 21 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 19 mentions; 11 submissions, 8 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 22 mentions; 13 submissions, 9 comments20202021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 20 mentions; 5 submissions, 15 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 27 mentions; 7 submissions, 20 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 32 mentions; 11 submissions, 21 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 39 mentions; 11 submissions, 28 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 17 mentions; 3 submissions, 14 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 31 mentions; 8 submissions, 23 comments. Incomplete calendar period.2026*

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20142014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC14311
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC964155
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC682345
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC662541
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC311021
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC19118
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC22139
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC20515
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC27720
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC321121
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC391128
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC17314
2026 (partial)2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC31823

What Hacker News says

32 sources
kklisura·Oct 24, 2023
Replace buffer in your example with plain object or just array - that rest of it still stands, right? There's something other at play: > buffers expose private information through global variables, a potential security risk. This links to following piece of code [1]: > // Somewhere in your code > const privateBuf = Buffer.from(privateKey, 'hex'); > // Rogue package can access > Buffer.from('1').buffer I've just run it in node, and my god am I shocked! > const privateBuf = Buffer.from('DEADBEEF', 'hex'); > Buffer.from('1').buffer > ArrayBuffer { [Uint8Contents]: <2f 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 de ad be ef 00 > .... [1] https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/41588#issuecomment-101...
In Goodbye, Node.js Buffer
stephen·Oct 9, 2023
One of Bun's assertions is that their AsyncLocalStorage is significantly faster than Node's, b/c it purposefully only implements the subset of async_hooks that can be implemented w/o affecting performance: https://github.com/oven-sh/bun/pull/3089 I haven't had a chance to test it out yet, but perhaps the OP could add Bun to the mix? To compare it's promise overhead vs. Node's promise overhead. Also there is an issue in Node about performing the same optimization: https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/46265
In The Performance Cost of Node.js and GraphQL

Showing the 15 most recent of 32 sources. Enable JavaScript to search and browse every indexed mention.

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.