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

New C# to Javascript compiler released

erik-kallen.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 81 posts

Re: New C# to Javascript compiler released

#21

Post by giulianob »

prasincs wrote: post #4
bdfh42 wrote: post #2

The very best of luck when it comes to debugging the code when it is running in the browser. Maybe your experiences are different to mine but I avoid such abstractions wherever possible. It has become fashionable to say things like "JavaScript ... is not well suited for developing large systems" - indeed so much so it often passes without comment but when it is JavaScript that will be run by the browser then JavaScri…

I agree. Having had used GWT and other similar cross compiling to javascript type tools, it's often a huge problem in debugging than if you just write a short javascript code. No offense to the author but projects like these that try to fit a static language like Java/C# that run in their own managed environments into dynamic world of Javascript fail miserably. I fear projects like these tend to attract programmers w…

I program both C# and JS on an almost daily basis and am pretty well versed in both. I have to say that JS is great for adding scripting to pages but for large apps it's a nightmare (especially when coupled w/ the dom).

Re: New C# to Javascript compiler released

#24

Post by batista »

mistercow wrote: post #10
bdfh42 wrote: post #2

The very best of luck when it comes to debugging the code when it is running in the browser. Maybe your experiences are different to mine but I avoid such abstractions wherever possible. It has become fashionable to say things like "JavaScript ... is not well suited for developing large systems" - indeed so much so it often passes without comment but when it is JavaScript that will be run by the browser then JavaScri…

>when it is JavaScript that will be run by the browser then JavaScript is what you should be writing. Of course, source maps will soon make this point largely moot.

Haven't happened for the last 2 years we've been waiting for them.

Re: New C# to Javascript compiler released

#26

Post by raverbashing »

prasincs wrote: post #4
bdfh42 wrote: post #2

The very best of luck when it comes to debugging the code when it is running in the browser. Maybe your experiences are different to mine but I avoid such abstractions wherever possible. It has become fashionable to say things like "JavaScript ... is not well suited for developing large systems" - indeed so much so it often passes without comment but when it is JavaScript that will be run by the browser then JavaScri…

I agree. Having had used GWT and other similar cross compiling to javascript type tools, it's often a huge problem in debugging than if you just write a short javascript code. No offense to the author but projects like these that try to fit a static language like Java/C# that run in their own managed environments into dynamic world of Javascript fail miserably. I fear projects like these tend to attract programmers w…

Really, really

GWT is not the answer, Dart is not the answer, not writing JS is not the answer (maybe CoffeeScript but I'm skeptical)

JS may have its warts, but in the end that's what browsers understand. That's what you'll have to know to debug things.

And the browser doesn't have to execute 2x, 3x the code, and use more memory as well

If you want something to help my perception is that it should be a thin shin (like CS) rather than "full bells and whistles" on top like GWT or Dart

Re: New C# to Javascript compiler released

#27

Post by bdfh42 »

marcelvr wrote: post #6
bdfh42 wrote: post #2

The very best of luck when it comes to debugging the code when it is running in the browser. Maybe your experiences are different to mine but I avoid such abstractions wherever possible. It has become fashionable to say things like "JavaScript ... is not well suited for developing large systems" - indeed so much so it often passes without comment but when it is JavaScript that will be run by the browser then JavaScri…

"... but when it is JavaScript that will be run by the browser then JavaScript is what you should be writing." So by that logic, one shouldn't be writing C# that targets the CLR either, but should rather be coding in MSIL directly. Mmm, no thanks!

But JavaScript is not (another daft meme) "the assembler of the web" as it is itself interpreted (or what have you) into byte code for execution.

The point is that one should limit the level of abstraction to one which sits in that comfort zone between code that is sensible to humans and code that is sensible to the machine running it and (perhaps more importantly) the available dev/debug tools.

Re: New C# to Javascript compiler released

#28

Post by bdfh42 »

WayneDB wrote: post #16
bdfh42 wrote: post #2

The very best of luck when it comes to debugging the code when it is running in the browser. Maybe your experiences are different to mine but I avoid such abstractions wherever possible. It has become fashionable to say things like "JavaScript ... is not well suited for developing large systems" - indeed so much so it often passes without comment but when it is JavaScript that will be run by the browser then JavaScri…

I don't see the problem. - If I had written Javascript, I would have to debug the Javascript that is running in the browser. - If a tool writes Javascript for me, I have to debug Javascript running in the browser. A better wish would be: I hope that your tool outputs nicely formatted and easy to debug Javascript.

But it will not write JavaScript the way you would write it - and (avoiding arguments about personality in code) that JavaScript will be way harder to follow and debug.

Re: New C# to Javascript compiler released

#29

Post by bdfh42 »

giulianob wrote: post #21
prasincs wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. Having had used GWT and other similar cross compiling to javascript type tools, it's often a huge problem in debugging than if you just write a short javascript code. No offense to the author but projects like these that try to fit a static language like Java/C# that run in their own managed environments into dynamic world of Javascript fail miserably. I fear projects like these tend to attract programmers w…

I program both C# and JS on an almost daily basis and am pretty well versed in both. I have to say that JS is great for adding scripting to pages but for large apps it's a nightmare (especially when coupled w/ the dom).

I think it would help the discussion if you could define a "large app" as far as JavaScript is concerned and why you think it is a "nightmare".

Re: New C# to Javascript compiler released

#30

Post by erik-kallen »

acron0 wrote: post #25

Not entirely the same, but for those of us on Window, I prefer the look of http://jsil.org .

JSIL is also great, but its philosophy is that yo write .net code and run it in the browser, whereas Saltarelle's (and Script#'s) is that you write Javascript but with better tools. Also, the script that JSIL generates is very far from what you would write by hand, whereas that generated by Saltarelle/Script# can be distinguished from hand-written script primarily because the indentation is always correct and there is never an accidental loose comparison operator.
Post reply on HN