About pnpx deprecation

[ftzi]

Having to type pnpm dlx X instead of just pnpx X really annoys me, as I like quicker stuff. It's obvious that 1~2s of extra typing isn't much but every single time I have to type it I feel it could just be shorter as efficiency/automation/simplicity matters a lot to me, to the point that it made me create this discussion here lol.

I imagine that you deprecated it to remove the exec/dlx ambiguity that it had, but honestly, we should have a short command to always execute dlx. pnx, plx, pdlx... honestly any short command would do it for me. I feel that the point of running remote packages is to fastly run stuff and pnpm dlx X goes contrary to this feeling. Maybe we can just make pnpx to not run local packages in the next major. pnpm X already executes a local package, and if the project has a script with the same package name (uncommon case), they can just use pnpm exec to be sure.

pnpm is already better than npm and yarn, I have no doubt. But this really small thing really annoys my daily usage of it.

[lvqq]

I have started a project for pnpm alias rencently. If you are working with Windows Powershell/Command or zsh/bash, it may help.

[lvqq]

Yeah, i'm not sure if it will be builtin in the future😂

[zkochan]

pnpx is also not easy to type.

[ftzi]

I agree, but it's better than pnpm dlx. I guess pnx would do it greatly. px would also do it but it doesn't seem as clear as pnx. Also, notice that pnx is npx with p <-> n, so that's kinda cool!

[iamchathu]

Is there any update on this?

[ftzi]

I wish there was!

[angelhdzdev]

You don't know how much this infuriates me. I opened a discussion and don't remember the outcome.

Every time Im installing some package and see the npx , muscular memory kicks in and I type pnpx, only to remember reading somewhere they made pnpx deprecated in favor of pnpm dlx. It's sooo silly, unnecessary, anti-DX.