Live data from Hacker News

Apple's new Objective-C to Javascript Bridge

steamclock.com

51–60 of 110 posts

Re: Apple's new Objective-C to Javascript Bridge

#51
post #10

The future is arriving- slowly. Hopefully soon we will be able to make the core of our apps cross-platform by leveraging languages like Javascript, and only resorting to platform-specific code for UI layers. Here's hoping.

Uhm, why 'soon'? Just write the core of your application in C++ and marry said core with platform specific languages for UI code.

Because C++ doesn't run in the browser

Re: Apple's new Objective-C to Javascript Bridge

#52
I never had a big problem with Obj-C. It felt like any other language other than having to manually manage memory. The problem I struggled with was Cocoa as a whole. It may no longer be the case but not too long ago, there was a lack of consistency between the different APIs / SDKs. Most would written and accessed with Obj-C. A few would still be in Ansi-C. For someone who isn't a C expert, this just killed me.

Does this bridge help fix that?

Re: Apple's new Objective-C to Javascript Bridge

#53
Cue the typical and tiresome language-wars snark. (And time to burn some karma.) This kind of behavior is often just a shallow and distinctly anti-intellectual "irrational jingoism." If you read between the lines, so much of it just comes down to "I don't like X. I don't understand X. Doing X in the programming I do wouldn't work. It just must be bad."

That's so often just about outward signs. Programming is complicated, and the fields of programming and Computer Science are vast. If you're not aware of how miniscule a sliver of the whole thing you command, odds are you're just another unwitting Dunning Krueger victim.

Don't judge a language by what you find strange. Don't judge a language just because it wouldn't suit what you do. Figure out what makes it powerful and why it works. Until you do that, please just shut up and don't add to the noise.

Re: Apple's new Objective-C to Javascript Bridge

#54
post #22

great for people wanting to script games and don't want to get into LUA :)

> great for people wanting to script games and don't want to get into LUA :) Beware of people who are portraying themselves as "savvy" yet don't know how to spell Lua.

Wow...

Re: Apple's new Objective-C to Javascript Bridge

#55
post #35
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually like Javascript. Sure it has some warts. But it has an elegance I've really only seen in Javascript, Lua, and Lisp.

You last sentence is a bit far-fetched.

It is an elegant weapon, for a more civilized age

Re: Apple's new Objective-C to Javascript Bridge

#56
post #46
post #2

My guess is that this would be fast enough to build almost any Mac app and many iOS apps. The bigger question for me is, how gross would it be to deal with the "Objective-C-ness" of the Cocoa APIs through JavaScript?

It's important to remember that Apple shipped both the Ruby and Python Objective-C bridges in ~10.5 era OS X. You can (and I have) written OS X native software in Python; it wasn't super pretty, but the concepts mapped across reasonably well. So I wouldn't take this as necessarily the sign of a shift in anything.

Also, people at Apple like Objective-C and its Smalltalk influences. For those of us who've been in the NeXT/Apple ecosystem a long time, it's clear that employees at Apple see Ruby as more interesting than say Javascript because of the Smalltalk influences. If any shift were to occur, money is on Ruby. But Apple likes Objective-C and no shift seems likely and we also saw what happened with MacRuby and the author leaving to do RubyMotion.

Re: Apple's new Objective-C to Javascript Bridge

#57
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You last sentence is a bit far-fetched.

The referred sentence is a matter of opinion, so it's a bit far-fetched to say it's a bit far-fetched, IMO. From what I know of Lua, it's fairly tiny, and it has ready access to its own meta-level -- to the point where there can be a blurring of programming and meta-programming. Instead of everything "being an Object," everything is in a table. Just rename "table" to "object" and call it a prototypical day.

No it's not, jokes aside, implicitly comparing Javascript to Lisp from the point of view of elegance is simply incorrect, for many definitions of "elegance".

Re: Apple's new Objective-C to Javascript Bridge

#58
post #56
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's important to remember that Apple shipped both the Ruby and Python Objective-C bridges in ~10.5 era OS X. You can (and I have) written OS X native software in Python; it wasn't super pretty, but the concepts mapped across reasonably well. So I wouldn't take this as necessarily the sign of a shift in anything.

Also, people at Apple like Objective-C and its Smalltalk influences. For those of us who've been in the NeXT/Apple ecosystem a long time, it's clear that employees at Apple see Ruby as more interesting than say Javascript because of the Smalltalk influences. If any shift were to occur, money is on Ruby. But Apple likes Objective-C and no shift seems likely and we also saw what happened with MacRuby and the author lea…

And they've invested a lot in the tooling and environment. It's not like they're just running a stock gcc toolchain; they've put a lot of very smart people on very hard problems in the language space.

Re: Apple's new Objective-C to Javascript Bridge

#60
post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The referred sentence is a matter of opinion, so it's a bit far-fetched to say it's a bit far-fetched, IMO. From what I know of Lua, it's fairly tiny, and it has ready access to its own meta-level -- to the point where there can be a blurring of programming and meta-programming. Instead of everything "being an Object," everything is in a table. Just rename "table" to "object" and call it a prototypical day.

No it's not, jokes aside, implicitly comparing Javascript to Lisp from the point of view of elegance is simply incorrect, for many definitions of "elegance".

And for how many definitions of "comparable?" Lose a point for careless reading.
Post reply on HN