Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

JavaScript Conquered the Web, Now It’s Taking Over the Desktop

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 270 posts

Re: JavaScript Conquered the Web, Now It’s Taking Over the Desktop

#101

Post by cwyers »

oblio wrote: post #87
simula67 wrote: post #62

> It turns out it’s useful to have a lingua franca for the web. No, I don't think so. Most people do not use JavaScript since it is useful. They use it since it is the only option available on the browser. There is a BIG difference. > Creating desktop apps in JavaScript lets developers choose from a vast range of freely available code libraries and frameworks, which takes much of the grunt work out of coding Lots of…

> Slightly tangentially though, I wonder if we really really put our mind to it, will we be able to just kill JavaScript ? Humans that "really wanted to" landed on the Moon, brought hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, cured polio and brought down Communism. The real problem is that you'll never get that many people to agree on something like killing Javascript and creating something radically superior (wha…

Here's the thing -- we didn't need to get the moon's participation. A moon shot is an application of physics, with some concern for weight tradeoffs and fuel energy density and the like. It's not a coordination problem.

Re: JavaScript Conquered the Web, Now It’s Taking Over the Desktop

#102

Post by goatlover »

fzzzy wrote: post #95
pcwalton wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let's just call this experiment a failure The problem with "just calling this experiment a failure"—why that won't work in practice—is that JavaScript is not a failure. It's extremely successful.

And it is extremely successful because it's not a bad language. Sure, there's lots of "wat", but a non-professional programmer is going to say "wat" about every strange error they get from another programming language that js would have just passed silently with a weird result. Then they will replace whatever construct isn't working with one that does, and get on with their life, unlike people who seem to have a lot…

Sure, but there are better alternatives, and now that JS isn't just confined to the web, where it had no real competition, people are complaining because they see it being used instead of better tools that have been available for a long time.

Re: JavaScript Conquered the Web, Now It’s Taking Over the Desktop

#103

Post by inputcoffee »

pcwalton wrote: post #83
inputcoffee wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with the first part. The issues of: "utility of lingua franca" and "ubiquity of Javascript" are orthogonal issues. It seems everyone agrees that Javascript would not have been the first choice of language. There is no short argument there, you have to go out and try at least one other language and compare them. However, on the second question, I don't see why it is useful to have a lingua franca. Multiple lan…

Because all of the languages supported by the browser have to interact with the DOM. DOM memory management is incredibly tricky: it will not do to just have "an agreed upon format" to exchange data between such languages. You need all the languages to participate in a single garbage collection regime and to have semantics for interoperability at the object level between all of them, which is a very difficult problem.…

When I said "agreed upon format" I was thinking of something like JSON to talking to the server. I didn't think of various tabs on a browser having to interact.

You probably know more about how the browser works than I do, but I think I see what you're saying.

Suppose we implemented a browser that can allows front ends coded in RUST. In my mind, the browser just gives the RUST app its own tab, with its own memory and so forth.

I am not proposing mixing up languages for the a given front end, or for components within an application or anything. Not because I think that would be wrong, but because I haven't thought it through.

Re: JavaScript Conquered the Web, Now It’s Taking Over the Desktop

#104

Post by goatlover »

tobltobs wrote: post #90
pcwalton wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let's just call this experiment a failure The problem with "just calling this experiment a failure"—why that won't work in practice—is that JavaScript is not a failure. It's extremely successful.

Browsers are successful and Javascript was lucky to be the common base of browser languages.

Pretty much this, although arguably JS's flexibility aided in allowing developers to get around various limitations. That can be seen as a good or bad thing, depending.

Re: JavaScript Conquered the Web, Now It’s Taking Over the Desktop

#105

Post by b123400 »

When I choose softwares, I tend to choose native one over electron or JavaFX ones. It feels more native and more "sincere", like the developer really want to make it a good software. I know this logic doesn't make sense, but I don't mind paying more if it is native. It's like a handwritten letter, not a printed one.

Re: JavaScript Conquered the Web, Now It’s Taking Over the Desktop

#106

Post by bluetidepro »

b123400 wrote: post #105

When I choose softwares, I tend to choose native one over electron or JavaFX ones. It feels more native and more "sincere", like the developer really want to make it a good software. I know this logic doesn't make sense, but I don't mind paying more if it is native. It's like a handwritten letter, not a printed one.

> "...I don't mind paying more if it is native..."

I'm curious on how you know this before you even purchase? For example, the Mac app store can have both native and electron apps? You wouldn't know it's native or not until after you purchase it?

Re: JavaScript Conquered the Web, Now It’s Taking Over the Desktop

#107

Post by noobermin »

simula67 wrote: post #62

> It turns out it’s useful to have a lingua franca for the web. No, I don't think so. Most people do not use JavaScript since it is useful. They use it since it is the only option available on the browser. There is a BIG difference. > Creating desktop apps in JavaScript lets developers choose from a vast range of freely available code libraries and frameworks, which takes much of the grunt work out of coding Lots of…

For [1] many languages have "wat"'s. Also, the leap from "wat"'s to "absolutely bad programming" is a jump in reasoning. You can be a poor hacker in any language.

For [2] and [4], they are issues with the ecosystem, which I suppose it related but isn't strictly js, ie., you don't have to use React (shock). For npm, at least that issue has been addressed.

[3] is a social issue...it happens in many places. Can you claim that the university system is flawed due to similar attitudes of students who attend university?

Re: JavaScript Conquered the Web, Now It’s Taking Over the Desktop

#108

Post by goatlover »

dilann wrote: post #44
jaquers wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the spirit of the argument is that if you have requirements for heavy computation such that you need multithreading + low level memory management, then you probably shouldn't use this. Use the right tool for the job. This is just one of them. Plus there are alternatives to threads. Look at the state of Atom or VSCode. Much progress has been made in terms of perf and these are not trivial applications.

> Use the right tool for the job That's a funny argument in a thread about js. Js has started as a small language to do scripting on the pages, now they are sticking it everywhere.

Because people don't actually use the right tool for the job when it comes to software. Instead, they take the tool they know, ignore the better tools they would rather not have to learn, and make the known tool do things it was never designed for.

Excel is a great example of that, but it's done with programming languages as well.

Re: JavaScript Conquered the Web, Now It’s Taking Over the Desktop

#109

Post by fzzzy »

goatlover wrote: post #102
fzzzy wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it is extremely successful because it's not a bad language. Sure, there's lots of "wat", but a non-professional programmer is going to say "wat" about every strange error they get from another programming language that js would have just passed silently with a weird result. Then they will replace whatever construct isn't working with one that does, and get on with their life, unlike people who seem to have a lot…

Sure, but there are better alternatives, and now that JS isn't just confined to the web, where it had no real competition, people are complaining because they see it being used instead of better tools that have been available for a long time.

ES6 is better.

[edit] ES6 is definitely better than a swift kick in the groin. It is certainly better than the original version of javascript. And it is also better than a lobotomy.

Post reply on HN