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

Dart 1.0 Is Out

news.dartlang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 162 posts

Re: Dart 1.0 Is Out

#61

Post by munificent »

tzury wrote: post #12

So if i get it right, the way "Google" sees the future, there is Go at the server side and Dart at client side (which is in fact JS). Am I wrong? I would expect Google, or at least, a team at Google, to take over NodeJS which is based on their V8 and expand it to universal server client language and libs. JS can be complied into go binaries after all, so why not letting people write apps using the same language. Let…

> I see no effort on their side bringing any of those language into the native world of Android

The Dart VM supports ARM, and I've seen prototypes that get it running on Android. The team hasn't had much time to put into it yet, but I wouldn't infer that that says much about what we'll do in the future. (Not that I'm making any promises, either.)

Re: Dart 1.0 Is Out

#62

Post by munificent »

woven wrote: post #49

Psyched! See our HN post about our Dart app (Dart rocks) and our team's disappointment with not being included in the 1.0 announcement. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6735044

I don't know anything about what went into deciding which companies were mentioned in the announcement, but I know for certain I and others on the team have a ton of respect and gratitude for all of the help you and Kai have given us. Thanks!

Re: Dart 1.0 Is Out

#63

Post by kevincennis »

amix wrote: post #17

This is really awesome! Congrats to the team! We have a ton of JavaScript/CoffeeScript code and I really wish we could use something like Dart. JavaScript is great for smaller projects, but once you get a ton of code it really becomes a unmanageable mess. I think tho' it would be amazing if Dart could run on the server side as well. This way you could just have one language on both the client and the server.

In fairness to JavaScript, it is absolutely possible to write very large apps and keep them organized and maintainable.

I think the issue is that JS doesn't have strong conventions for how to do that, so you actually need to make good choices that work well with your app.

I have no doubt that Dart makes that stuff easier, but there's nothing inherent to JavaScript that makes it unsuitable for larger applications. It just forces you to make decisions.

Re: Dart 1.0 Is Out

#64

Post by coldtea »

RobAtticus wrote: post #52
camus2 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you use language X that compiles to javascript ,you still need to learn javascript, Or it's a bit like learning rails without understanding ruby.

I don't need to learn assembly to use C. I don't need to learn the JVM bytecode to use Java. Sure for special cases knowing those things can help get the very best out of your code, but for the other 99% of the time, it is not necessary. (Edit: Not that I recommend Dart over JS necessarily, but I don't agree with your argument.)

>I don't need to learn assembly to use C. I don't need to learn the JVM bytecode to use Java.

But you DO need to learn Javascript to use Dart on web apps, so the comparison is irrelevant.

Re: Dart 1.0 Is Out

#65

Post by rdtsc »

kevincennis wrote: post #63
amix wrote: post #17

This is really awesome! Congrats to the team! We have a ton of JavaScript/CoffeeScript code and I really wish we could use something like Dart. JavaScript is great for smaller projects, but once you get a ton of code it really becomes a unmanageable mess. I think tho' it would be amazing if Dart could run on the server side as well. This way you could just have one language on both the client and the server.

In fairness to JavaScript, it is absolutely possible to write very large apps and keep them organized and maintainable. I think the issue is that JS doesn't have strong conventions for how to do that, so you actually need to make good choices that work well with your app. I have no doubt that Dart makes that stuff easier, but there's nothing inherent to JavaScript that makes it unsuitable for larger applications. It…

> In fairness to JavaScript, it is absolutely possible to write very large apps and keep them organized and maintainable.

I see it a bit like when Dijkstra wrote "Go To Statement Considered Harmful". I have no doubt a lot of developers at the time objected to it and said "that is wrong, it is possible to write good code using GOTO". Because they probably wrote code using GOTOs and some of that code was probably decent quality.

Re: Dart 1.0 Is Out

#66

Post by amackera »

nilliams wrote: post #7
notok22 wrote: post #4

I almost finished the Language Tour when I went to the faq and was dissapointed to see that the dart2js compiler supports only ie9+ ( https://www.dartlang.org/support/faq.html#what-browsers-supp... ). Too bad, honestly.

Opinion: nobody should be shipping any JS to oldIE, period. Their JS engines are woeful. Even if you can get something app-like (the kind of thing you would use dart for) to work , your app won't scale w.r.t. perf so you're painting yourself into a corner.

The reality is that lots of web apps must be capable of running on IE due to external restrictions (think enterprise or government).

Re: Dart 1.0 Is Out

#68

Post by nine_k »

rdtsc wrote: post #65
kevincennis wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fairness to JavaScript, it is absolutely possible to write very large apps and keep them organized and maintainable. I think the issue is that JS doesn't have strong conventions for how to do that, so you actually need to make good choices that work well with your app. I have no doubt that Dart makes that stuff easier, but there's nothing inherent to JavaScript that makes it unsuitable for larger applications. It…

> In fairness to JavaScript, it is absolutely possible to write very large apps and keep them organized and maintainable. I see it a bit like when Dijkstra wrote "Go To Statement Considered Harmful". I have no doubt a lot of developers at the time objected to it and said "that is wrong, it is possible to write good code using GOTO". Because they probably wrote code using GOTOs and some of that code was probably decen…

In C it is almost customary to use `goto` as poor man's exception handler: you do `goto cleanup` from inside of nested ifs and loops if a fatal error happens and all you need is to clean up what needs cleaning and return an error code.

The problem is that `goto` is easy to abuse, and, worse, easy to abuse inadvertently, e.g. you might produce a `goto` into a loop or something like that during refactoring.

JavaScript is like one big `goto` in this regard.

Re: Dart 1.0 Is Out

#69

Post by threeseed »

limsup wrote: post #14
andyl wrote: post #9

Just waiting for "Works best on Chrome" Silverlight and ActiveX have already shown the usefulness of proprietary enhancements. No thanks.

It compiles to JavaScript. The VM and dart2js are MIT licensed. It's not the same situation.

And who is responsible for keeping the DartVM/Dart2JS behaviour in sync ?

Google being the ONLY committers don't exactly have a motivation to.

Re: Dart 1.0 Is Out

#70

Post by threeseed »

nilliams wrote: post #60
quarterto wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's your opinion and you're entitled to it but people do still have to ship things for IE6-8.

Understood. I'd just question if it needed JS - if JS actually added to the UX and outweighed the considerable dev cost.

How on earth do you propose to implement client side functionality without JS ?

The fact is that MANY people need to support IE6-8.

Post reply on HN