Open
Conversation
Author
|
Ha, the funny thing is back in May 2020, @gfaiks pinged me with a Babel/ES6 issue that was resolved by switching from lru-cache to lru... I'm still not seeing the issue, but it's possible I'm using too new of a browser? |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
They have an identical API (for our purposes), but lru-cache is fully browser-ready, whereas lru has some node-specific requirements (i.e., namely the
eventslibrary). In my update-tooling effort, lru causedesbuildto error, while lru-cache did not. Also, lru was last updated 5 years ago, whereas lru-cache was last updated 10 months ago.Note: I have verified SDS functionality remained the same.