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

Why don't they implement Python and Ruby on the web browsers?

stackoverflow.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 144 posts

Re: Why don't they implement Python and Ruby on the web browsers?

#131

Post by slurgfest »

ebbv wrote: post #26

If you spend all your energy complaining about JavaScript and demanding the browser vendors provide you with a better replacement the problem here is not JavaScript, it's you. JavaScript is far from the best language ever created, but it's also far from the worst. The biggest pain in the ass working with JavaScript on a day to day basis is not JavaScript itself -- most of its follies can be avoided by good programmin…

I really don't think it's fair to insist that if anyone doesn't think Javascript is the optimal solution to every client-side web programming problem, they are themselves 'the problem'.

"There are worse things than Javascript" is not a great argument for why nobody should ever try to improve the situation.

Re: Why don't they implement Python and Ruby on the web browsers?

#132

Post by slurgfest »

wwweston wrote: post #53
riffraff wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Javascript was bad for innovation, I sure don't see it. This is a fallacy: in absence of a peek at some alternative world where something else was available, you can't tell that javascript improved or worsened the innovation rate.

It seems pretty reasonable to observe the desktop world, though, since it has the properties under discussion, and ask ourselves whether it's easier to deploy an application to a wide audience there or on the web.

Well, the problem is that this confounds all the properties of "the desktop world" with the properties of another client-side substitute for Javascript (like, say, Dart or some language using NaCl)

Re: Why don't they implement Python and Ruby on the web browsers?

#133

Post by starwed »

nknight wrote: post #126
starwed wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A version of jemalloc specifically written for mozilla's codebase. If it were a 100% compatible drop in replacement for malloc, why hasn't every other project switched to jemalloc yet? (Searching for switching to jemalloc , seems like every group that tried it out found that their code base or use case exposed new problems in jemalloc. That these could be fixed doesn't negate the main point -- you couldn't just switc…

I don't think I've ever seen a more dramatic real-world example of unwittingly strengthening the point you're arguing against. jemalloc didn't work quite as they wanted, so they customized it, and you really think that's a counterpoint to an argument for trying new and different things?

Ah, you're right, it's so simple! If changing the JS engine breaks a web site, the sites authors will either customize the JS engine, or choose not to switch after all!

No, wait a minute...

Re: Why don't they implement Python and Ruby on the web browsers?

#134

Post by wladimir »

nupark2 wrote: post #8

The top comment states that any other options are impossible: "At this point we must concentrate on improving the language." I can't stand this willfully defeatist attitude. It's also not restricted to stack-overflow participants -- this position is pervasive at Mozilla. Why can't we have a standardized generic bytecode and VMs to run it? Why should the web be locked to a single language forever ? Can you imagine if…

A generalized, dynamic-language friendly bytecode to replace Javascript would be great. Please let me choose to use Python for client-side web without resorting to language cross-translation hacks.

Find the commonalities between Ruby, Python and Javascript and such (there are a lot!) and base the VM on that. "Legacy" javascript can then run in the existing VM. For JS, people can choose to compile it or let the browser compile it.

On the other hand I don't like NaCL at all. Even with all the security measures, there is just too much risk in executing native code directly from the web. Also it splits up platforms, splitting the client world into x86 and ARM, instead of allowing for innovation in CPU-land by exposing are more abstract interface. It is a repeat of the "browser plugin" paradigm, which luckily failed.

Re: Why don't they implement Python and Ruby on the web browsers?

#135

Post by Tobu »

GigabyteCoin wrote: post #105
Tobu wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's justified. The site is used for problem solving. Here the problem isn't the asker's, it can't be meaningfully solved by anyone on the site, and it is a matter of opinion whether any answer comes closer to solving it, or that there is a problem at all.

re: "The site is used for problem solving." So says YOU. What's so inherently wrong with letting the people decide? Obviously, a few hundred people found that post quite relevant to the website's topic, helpful, and interesting. What gives Casper the right to destroy hundreds of people's discussion on a topic that they all deem relevant. The "vote" on that action was approximately 300 to 1. That 1 vote of no confiden…

So says the sites' FAQ:

> You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page.

The ability to decide what Stack Overflow is and isn't is what makes it a community, and not a jumble like Yahoo Answers.

And the specifics of closing questions don't have the violence of Wikipedia deletions. I don't approve of deleting user-contributed content, especially when it takes effort to build; closing on SO removes linking to the question, adds a little explanatory blurb, and diverts new attention away from the question. It doesn't destroy user contributions.

Re: Why don't they implement Python and Ruby on the web browsers?

#137

Post by rat87 »

nupark2 wrote: post #28
zokier wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, what if we had locked mobile to a single language... like Android (Java), iOS (ObjC), WP7 (C#/Silverlight), webOS (JavaScript), Symbian (Symbian/C++). Oh, well... at least we have the glaring success of MeeGo which didn't embrace single language completely.

I'll break this down: - Android: Java, NDK (C++, C), ObjC (via Apportable), MonoTouch (C#/F#), Lua, JS - iOS: C, C++, ObjC, JS, Lua, MonoTouch ... actually, that's as far as I want to go. Point is, you can pick your implementation language, and people do. We're also likely to see additional language explorations on these platforms as they stabilize and mature.

> Android: ObjC ???

Re: Why don't they implement Python and Ruby on the web browsers?

#138

Post by GigabyteCoin »

Tobu wrote: post #135
GigabyteCoin wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

re: "The site is used for problem solving." So says YOU. What's so inherently wrong with letting the people decide? Obviously, a few hundred people found that post quite relevant to the website's topic, helpful, and interesting. What gives Casper the right to destroy hundreds of people's discussion on a topic that they all deem relevant. The "vote" on that action was approximately 300 to 1. That 1 vote of no confiden…

So says the sites' FAQ: > You should only ask practical, answerable questions based on actual problems that you face. Chatty, open-ended questions diminish the usefulness of our site and push other questions off the front page. The ability to decide what Stack Overflow is and isn't is what makes it a community, and not a jumble like Yahoo Answers. And the specifics of closing questions don't have the violence of Wiki…

Now you (and the site's rules) are just getting pedantic.

What's the legal definition of a "Chatty, open-ended question" or a "practicable, answerable question"? No question is un-answerable or impracticable imho.

Those are some very ridiculous requirements if you ask me, and 300 odd other people who voted in favor of this question and it's answers.

P.S. in the midst of all this argument... CasperOne has added and removed his vote of no confidence for this question. It is now "closed as not constructive by Tim Cooper, lwburk, Tobu, 一二三, Graviton 8 hours ago". So which is it then?

Re: Why don't they implement Python and Ruby on the web browsers?

#139

Post by nupark2 »

rat87 wrote: post #137
nupark2 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll break this down: - Android: Java, NDK (C++, C), ObjC (via Apportable), MonoTouch (C#/F#), Lua, JS - iOS: C, C++, ObjC, JS, Lua, MonoTouch ... actually, that's as far as I want to go. Point is, you can pick your implementation language, and people do. We're also likely to see additional language explorations on these platforms as they stabilize and mature.

> Android: ObjC ???

I believe these guys have an NDK-based implementation: http://www.apportable.com/

Re: Why don't they implement Python and Ruby on the web browsers?

#140

Post by chc »

GigabyteCoin wrote: post #105
Tobu wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's justified. The site is used for problem solving. Here the problem isn't the asker's, it can't be meaningfully solved by anyone on the site, and it is a matter of opinion whether any answer comes closer to solving it, or that there is a problem at all.

re: "The site is used for problem solving." So says YOU. What's so inherently wrong with letting the people decide? Obviously, a few hundred people found that post quite relevant to the website's topic, helpful, and interesting. What gives Casper the right to destroy hundreds of people's discussion on a topic that they all deem relevant. The "vote" on that action was approximately 300 to 1. That 1 vote of no confiden…

Not everything is subjective. Stack Overflow has a stated purpose, and that purpose is not "whatever the most people feel like disussing." The Internet has proven that cats and politics will win that one every time.
Post reply on HN