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

Dart Is Not the Language You Think It Is

programming.oreilly.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 143 posts

Re: Dart Is Not the Language You Think It Is

#11

Post by dougk16 »

willlll wrote: post #5

Untyped languages are okay. Typed languages are also okay. Typed languages with inference are okay. Optionally typed is extremely strange.

I can definitely understand the sentiment if you haven't tried it. I knew optional typing existed in AS3 (which I use for prototyping certain ideas) for a long time before finally taking the plunge and using it here and there. It lets you blast through experimental code and remain nimble until such time as you want/need to add typing. Also a nice way to avoid long chains of method overloads, including overloading methods that only differ by return type, which is impossible to do in some (many?) languages.

Re: Dart Is Not the Language You Think It Is

#12

Post by andyl »

To me Dart looks like another brick in Google's walled garden. Weakening support for XMPP, Webkit, RSS, and JavaScript. Investment in so-called open technologies like NaCL and DART that are controlled by Google and optimized for Google's platform. Too bad.

Re: Dart Is Not the Language You Think It Is

#13

Post by mythz »

willlll wrote: post #5

Untyped languages are okay. Typed languages are also okay. Typed languages with inference are okay. Optionally typed is extremely strange.

Dart's optional typing is effectively a dynamic language that allows you to decorate your source with optional Type info that effectively just acts like documentation for other developers and automated tooling.

It's far more readable and concise having it embedded in the language rather than buried and disjointed in the comments. Not to mention it also allows for superior tooling support.

I've personally been extremely productive with Dart (most productive I've ever been with any language). It's effectively a more consistent JavaScript with less ceremony with the benefit of optional typing which has caught errors on a number of occasions, giving instant feedback and identifying errors before I've even run the code.

Re: Dart Is Not the Language You Think It Is

#14

Post by mythz »

andyl wrote: post #12

To me Dart looks like another brick in Google's walled garden. Weakening support for XMPP, Webkit, RSS, and JavaScript. Investment in so-called open technologies like NaCL and DART that are controlled by Google and optimized for Google's platform. Too bad.

Walled garden??

It's the most open language I know, fully OSS'ed with an extended license to include any implicit patents (removing Patent FUD), developed out in the open and accepting 3rd party contributions and inviting feedback to influence language design.

Lars Bak also mentioned at Google I/O that they're in the process of trying to get it standardized, not sure what's left to do to make it any more "open" and inviting.

Re: Dart Is Not the Language You Think It Is

#15

Post by spankalee »

andyl wrote: post #12

To me Dart looks like another brick in Google's walled garden. Weakening support for XMPP, Webkit, RSS, and JavaScript. Investment in so-called open technologies like NaCL and DART that are controlled by Google and optimized for Google's platform. Too bad.

Dart compiles to JavaScript, much like CoffeeScript, Microsoft's TypeScript, Haxe and many others, and they still make the fastest JavaScript VM on the planet.

Re: Dart Is Not the Language You Think It Is

#16

Post by kvb »

mythz wrote: post #13
willlll wrote: post #5

Untyped languages are okay. Typed languages are also okay. Typed languages with inference are okay. Optionally typed is extremely strange.

Dart's optional typing is effectively a dynamic language that allows you to decorate your source with optional Type info that effectively just acts like documentation for other developers and automated tooling. It's far more readable and concise having it embedded in the language rather than buried and disjointed in the comments. Not to mention it also allows for superior tooling support. I've personally been extreme…

As long as you're adding a type system (optional or not) it does seem a bit odd to opt for an unsound one...

Re: Dart Is Not the Language You Think It Is

#17

Post by roryokane »

dougk16 wrote: post #11
willlll wrote: post #5

Untyped languages are okay. Typed languages are also okay. Typed languages with inference are okay. Optionally typed is extremely strange.

I can definitely understand the sentiment if you haven't tried it. I knew optional typing existed in AS3 (which I use for prototyping certain ideas) for a long time before finally taking the plunge and using it here and there. It lets you blast through experimental code and remain nimble until such time as you want/need to add typing. Also a nice way to avoid long chains of method overloads, including overloading met…

Sorry, accidentally downvoted when I meant to upvote.

Re: Dart Is Not the Language You Think It Is

#18

Post by mythz »

kvb wrote: post #16
mythz wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dart's optional typing is effectively a dynamic language that allows you to decorate your source with optional Type info that effectively just acts like documentation for other developers and automated tooling. It's far more readable and concise having it embedded in the language rather than buried and disjointed in the comments. Not to mention it also allows for superior tooling support. I've personally been extreme…

As long as you're adding a type system (optional or not) it does seem a bit odd to opt for an unsound one...

makes sense if you prefer dynamic languages since it adds least friction.

Re: Dart Is Not the Language You Think It Is

#19

Post by oakaz »

Here is what I think about Dart: it is huge and is another programming planet that you can't reuse what you already have (like thousands of libraries in NPM).

And the most important part; it looks boring. the articles about it look also are very boring.

Re: Dart Is Not the Language You Think It Is

#20

Post by shurcooL »

I like what I see in the article, but... I'm kinda put off by the seemingly high barrier of entry. All the tools they show off are great once you've started, but I don't want to install all that just to try a slightly more advanced "hello world" sample.

It's really too bad there isn't an equivalent of play.golang.org for Dart. I would've given it a try right now if the barrier of entry were lower, and perhaps I'd be pleasantly surprised enough to keep using it.

Also, is it possible to generate and execute Dart code within Dart (the way it is in dynamic languages like JS) without recompiling?

Post reply on HN