Echo JS 0.11.0

And thank you for the sarcasm.
How come every comment from you must be this sour?

(I didn't downvote, by the way.)

Man, the grammar in the article is pretty bad...

Anyway, I don't think I'll use it until it'll have tree-shaking, but kudos for the effort. Creating a (decent) modern bundler isn't an easy task at all.

Ah, and another thing: referencing the project's root with "~". Really not a fan of it. I won't probably never load a module from the home directory, but this is messing with a widely estabilished convention.

I really don't get this approach to CSS. How is writing "c4 co2 mx1" any good if not for saving a couple of bytes - that could be shaved off by a minifier and a good bundling system anyway?
And if you want to "atomize" CSS like that, why don't you use inline styles and call it a day?
I feel like all the possible semantic approach is lost in the process.

Pretty old news, my friend.
Already reported here, too.

In English, please.

I'm dodging the problem because that's what you probably should do. Deep recursion brings a lot of problems in JavaScript - first of all, the stack's depth.

But you don't seem to even need that stack, since you're ready to use setTimeout, discarding the closure's scope: that's actually a clear sign that you should use another approach, probably iterative. That would give you a good performance boost too.

That's why using setTimeout is generally frowned upon: it's a hack to get over a language limitation that could be solved with other, more efficient techniques.

So I don't recommend using setTimeout, because I don't recommend using recursion in the first place. Tail call optimization, where available, could solve the depth problem but it won't yield a performance as good as an iterative approach.

The first thing to ask yourself is: why do I need such a deep recursion in the first place? Isn't there a better way?

Not JavaScript.

Nice, didn't know that. Kind of reminds me of Lwip (https://github.com/EyalAr/lwip) but it's entirely in JavaScript. I wonder if it keeps up with the speed.

The one you provided in the post. But now it seems to be fine.
Anyway, that service won't gain any success until served on https.