oh great, another shitty javascript fraemwork
Imba – A new programming language for the web
141–150 of 180 posts
Re: Imba – A new programming language for the web
#142The author of imba has some problems understanding languages vs frameworks/libraries. I quote: "Imba is a new programming language for the web that compiles to performant and readable JavaScript." Ok, so i understand Imba is a language spec with an implementation that compiles to javascript. "It has language level support for defining, extending, subclassing, instantiating and rendering dom nodes." Ok so there is spe…
>Wait, what? React is a javascript library, not a programming language. Written in javascript.... How can Imba be faster?
The same way an advanced primitive in a language can be faster than another language + framework code to do the same thing.
What exactly is startling? It's not like languages/libraries and frameworks have some hard defined boundaries. What's a library for one language can be built-in primitives for another (e.g. consider using vectors and hashmaps in C vs Python, or consider something even more powerful like APL or Rebol).
>Does Imba also include a dom-diffing algorithm.. If so, why would you built that into the language... Woudnt it be better to write a library in imba-lang that can do dom diffing?
No, it's not always better to have "a library" vs first class support. Not to mention that some things are impossible to do with regular user code in a language vs first class code (e.g. consider how Go's make() is "blessed" to work as a generic function).
Especially here, where the whole purpose of the language is to be a DSL for web programming and to incorporate all these conveniences.
Nothing new either: we have had languages with first class support for specific use cases since at least the 60's.
Re: Imba – A new programming language for the web
#143This isn't a competitor to react; its a competitor to ES6/typescript/coffeescript. React is a template library, not a language. JSX is a way to write templates, but that's not react, and its not what react does. It's just a shortcut to writing XML. You could say this is a competitor to JSX, perhaps; but anything more is hyperbole. People aren't using react and angular because they have a nice syntax , that's just nic…
>This isn't a competitor to react; its a competitor to ES6/typescript/coffeescript.
Perhaps you haven't looked at the examples.
>React is a template library, not a language.
Irrelevant -- and it's not such a clear cut distinction as you make it anyway.
A new language can have built in first class support for react like templating -- and this does.
>People aren't using react and angular because they have a nice syntax, that's just nice, they use them because you can build applications with them.
Yeah, so the idea behind imba is that if you could do the same things WITH a nice syntax and first class support it would be better.
Seriously do people read TFA?
Re: Imba – A new programming language for the web
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
REST was either popularized or outright invented by Ruby? What the f * are you on? Or were you born a few years ago and just worked with Ruby since then? Really, how could somebody be so oblivious to this field in order to state stuff like that?
Could you point me to a major web framework that used REST before Rails 1.2 (2006)? > What the f* are you on? Or were you born a few years ago and just worked with Ruby since then? I've been using Ruby professionally for 10 years.
2006? Come ON!
How about the whole WSDL/SOAP services that appeared way before that? You're telling me that Rails was the one who came out with the modern REST ideas?
That's total tech illiteracy right there. Damn, you even had the nerve to defend that feeble argument.
Re: Imba – A new programming language for the web
#145Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imba includes syntax for tags (scroll down to "Tags"), virtual DOM diffing, event handling (with touch support). Yes, React is not a language in itself, but there's quite big overlap in what Imba does and what React+JSX does. You build UI components like this: tag event event.title "Happening on {event.dateString}"
No. Read what I wrote again. You just wrote a template. That's like JSX. You ALSO need a library to do the virtaul dom stuff and/or data binding to write an application. React. !=. JSX. What you have here is a programming language that compiles to javascript and has an inbuilt templating language. So does ES6; `${hi}`. That's a fundamental building block, not a replacement for a high level framework , like react.
Please RTFA.
Re: Imba – A new programming language for the web
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can only conclude that you're so focused on aggressively dismissing this person's work, in the typical HN fashion, that you didn't actually read the comment you responded to, or any of their other responses throughout this thread. You say: >You ALSO need a library to do the virtaul dom stuff and/or data binding to write an application. OP says: >Imba includes syntax for tags (scroll down to "Tags"), virtual DOM dif…
judofyr's comment that you're quoting was posted after shadowmint's.
TFA however, which has examples of that stuff, was posted before shadowmint's.
If he was unsure about what he saw in those examples, then he could always refrain from pissing on the project until he had more information.
Re: Imba – A new programming language for the web
#147Okay, so I just took Imba for a little spin. Some thoughts: I like the way it looks. A lot. Love, love the tags. Really like the simplified object literals. The use of global variables for class state is deeply troubling - they are not scoped at all. The parser is far too forgiving. if you change do |x| x x into something like do x x x it will compile fine, but be wrong. The tooling is quite nice, and I like the defa…
Thanks for the feedback. What do you mean with global variables for class state? We do consider moving class-bodies inside an actual function (again) - but there is a virtual scope there in the compiler. So
class A
var i = 10
var i = 20
function A(){ };
var i1 = 10;
var i = 20;
Re: Imba – A new programming language for the web
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you point me to a major web framework that used REST before Rails 1.2 (2006)? > What the f* are you on? Or were you born a few years ago and just worked with Ruby since then? I've been using Ruby professionally for 10 years.
2006? Come ON! How about the whole WSDL/SOAP services that appeared way before that? You're telling me that Rails was the one who came out with the modern REST ideas? That's total tech illiteracy right there. Damn, you even had the nerve to defend that feeble argument.
WSDL/SOAP are not REST. I'm telling you that REST was popularized by Rails, because it was the first major web framework to use it. You've yet to refute that argument, but you do continue to be rude, so have a good one!
Re: Imba – A new programming language for the web
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can only conclude that you're so focused on aggressively dismissing this person's work, in the typical HN fashion, that you didn't actually read the comment you responded to, or any of their other responses throughout this thread. You say: >You ALSO need a library to do the virtaul dom stuff and/or data binding to write an application. OP says: >Imba includes syntax for tags (scroll down to "Tags"), virtual DOM dif…
judofyr's comment that you're quoting was posted after shadowmint's.
The second quote, maybe, but the first comes directly from the comment shadowmint is responding to here.
Re: Imba – A new programming language for the web
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
2006? Come ON! How about the whole WSDL/SOAP services that appeared way before that? You're telling me that Rails was the one who came out with the modern REST ideas? That's total tech illiteracy right there. Damn, you even had the nerve to defend that feeble argument.
WSDL/SOAP are not REST. I'm telling you that REST was popularized by Rails, because it was the first major web framework to use it. You've yet to refute that argument, but you do continue to be rude, so have a good one!
>WSDL/SOAP are not REST
Well if you define REST as "Web Apps developed with RoR" then I guess you're right, Rails is definiteley the pioneer of Rails development.
>You've yet to refute that argument
There was (at least) Tomcat deployed and quite popular, and yep, everything moved through REST interfaces. Even with that one and the huge success it had in the enterprise world, I wouldn't dare to say that the success of REST relies on Tomcat anyway.
REST hit it big with the www, www is REST's killer app. Those things are quite literally the first ones you should know when you start developing for the web.