Live data from Hacker News

The Birth and Death of JavaScript [video]

destroyallsoftware.com

191–200 of 236 posts

Re: The Birth and Death of JavaScript [video]

#191
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that something is "almost everywhere" doesn't make it good. It makes it useful at most. And your examples make sense, javascript doesn't (in some cases) so it's very appropriate to complain.

> so it's very appropriate to complain In that case, it's appropriate to complain about gravity & being restricted to the speed of light? No, it's better to learn about and use these properties to your advantage.

Are you seriously equating the laws of physics and human artefacts? That would be ludicrous. While the laws of physics are set in stone, human artefacts can be remade.

That changes everything

I'm sure you have the skills required to, say, write a preprocessor for whatever language you are using, and add some special constructs in it. Missing feature? Done in a few days. So…

If the laws of physics suck, suck it up.

If your tools suck, change them.

Re: The Birth and Death of JavaScript [video]

#192
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brendan Eich covered this subject at O'Reilly Fluent conference in 2012: http://youtu.be/Rj49rmc01Hs?t=5m7s

Brendan Eich is a homophobe and whoever links to his videos are complicit in his bigotry. All his opinions should be discarded.

Nobody's opinions should be discarded based on their behavior. Otherwise, we'd have a scant few scientists, artists, and thinkers in history actually worth discussing. (Also, people who link to him are complicit? Are you serious?)

Re: The Birth and Death of JavaScript [video]

#193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so it's very appropriate to complain In that case, it's appropriate to complain about gravity & being restricted to the speed of light? No, it's better to learn about and use these properties to your advantage.

Are you seriously equating the laws of physics and human artefacts? That would be ludicrous. While the laws of physics are set in stone, human artefacts can be remade. That changes everything I'm sure you have the skills required to, say, write a preprocessor for whatever language you are using, and add some special constructs in it. Missing feature? Done in a few days. So… If the laws of physics suck, suck it up. If…

> Are you seriously equating the laws of physics and human artefacts?

Yes I am. The property that they share is they will not be changed or avoided in the near future.

Another property is that despite certain limitations, you can still accomplish many things. If you focus on these limitations, you will accomplish less.

> If the laws of physics suck, suck it up.

Not in all cases. Physics is just a model of our understanding of physical existence. Einstein demonstrated that.

> If your tools suck, change them.

I guess if it's worth it to spend that much effort, then go ahead. Just know that the frequent examples of javascript's "problems" are easily surmountable, that is if you don't dwell on these "problems". Javascript has some great attributes to it.

Indeed, it does not "suck". That's like saying the human body sucks because we have this ridiculous tail bone and wisdom teeth. No accounting for taste, I suppose.

I choose to focus on that and progress in mastery of my craft. If you want to complain and/or change your tools, go ahead. I don't judge you.

Re: The Birth and Death of JavaScript [video]

#194
post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But it most assuredly has hurt me when trying to program with other people, who do not have a direct psychic hotline into my brain that tells them what preconditions must hold before my code will work properly, and what things they can and can not do with a certain library, and most importantly, why they can and can not do those things Programming is hard. It's an ongoing process of mastery. This is true with any p…

"business domain logic" Ah, you see, there's the problem... this wasn't business logic. To put it in Haskell terms, I had code that was not in IO, but I couldn't actually encode that restriction in the language. Most of your post amounts to "program better", which is vacuous advice. We've spent decades telling each other to "program better". We've proved to my satisfaction that's not enough. Have you used languages n…

> Ah, you see, there's the problem... this wasn't business logic.

What is "this"?

> Most of your post amounts to "program better", which is vacuous advice

No it's not. It's certainly better than dwelling on some edge case shortcomings and limiting your growth by blaming the tools.

No tool is perfect. Learn to use it better. Master it. Improve it. If you want to use a different tool, then use a different tool. There's no need to spread negativity.

There has been plenty of progress in Javascript idioms & programming idioms in the past few decades. You can accomplish many things with Javascript and the environment will only continue to improve. Programmers will continue to get better from the ecosystem & practices that have been learned over time.

Even your mighty Haskell is not perfect. Time to accept non-perfection & evolve :-)

> Have you used languages not from the same tradition as Javascript?

Yes, I have. I also draw inspiration from other languages & environments.

> It is possible, even likely, that you are not aware of the options that are available out there, even today.

Yes, I'm aware. When they prove themselves, I'll consider using them. In the meantime (and always), I'm happily mastering my craft free of unnecessary angst.

Re: The Birth and Death of JavaScript [video]

#195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With this logic you can defend anything. PHP's great if used in a good way: Zuckerman's a billionaire. Right? Why is anyone even bothering with PL these days? Sushi knives don't decide to cut you because the rice came from a different origin. And I'd guess that most craftsmen, outside of a ritual and tradition would love for their tools to have less disadvantages. If you want to draw an analogy to spaghetti (?), it'd…

The following perfectly describes my sentiments about all the complaints people have about JavaScript, PHP, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEY58fiSK8E

In that video, Louis is talking about himself in the third person: he's the one complaining on the plane. It's not about some group of "others" who are "bad" and don't appreciate the world; it's about our nature as humans.

Re: The Birth and Death of JavaScript [video]

#197
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Brendan Eich covered this subject at O'Reilly Fluent conference in 2012: http://youtu.be/Rj49rmc01Hs?t=5m7s

Brendan Eich is a homophobe and whoever links to his videos are complicit in his bigotry. All his opinions should be discarded.

You have no idea whether he's a homophobe or not, and clearly when the subject is Javascript his opinions should be considered very carefully.

Re: The Birth and Death of JavaScript [video]

#198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So we should just give up completely on trying to make better things? I don't think that was the point of the video (some amount of gratitude for the things we have) -- but then maybe I'm misunderstanding your point.

On the contrary. We should strive to correct all the "wats" that obviously exist in all these languages, but most of what I see is just complaints, most of them ignoring the amazing things that can be done with these technologies. Over 30 year I've been programming in more languages than I care to count, and I don't remember at any point having a specific language stop me from achieving my goal because it has some tr…

tl;dr: you can't necessarily change the troublesome technology, so you might have to leave. But in order to have a viable alternative to that "bad" technology, you need other people (case in point: mindshare of JS). In order to get more people to "your side", you might need to point out what is wrong with the original technology.

> But for heaven's sake, if you're not going to improve on it, stop whining about it and be grateful for the amazing things it does enable.

Sometimes you're not in a position to even be able to change something, even if you wanted to. The ideas you have in mind for a technology might fly in the face of how the community around that technology, or the guardians/maintainers of it, thinks of it - introducing these changes might break too much stuff that is dependent on it, the changes might fly in the face of the culture around that technology.

So if you have some technology that you think - subjectively, or even somewhat objectively if you have conviction enough - and you can not do anything about it, you only have two choices. Embrace it and try to work with it despite its flaws, or to abandon ship.

But if you want to abandon ship, you probably want to find a safe harbor, eventually. ie a place where you can develop or utilize some other technology. But that place might be sparsely populated, because everyone else is working with that other technology. So what do you do? You suggest that others jump ship. :)

Assuming that there is actually some kind of objective merit to complain about a specific technology, it might be wise to complain to others about that technology. That way they can hopefully use that info to make an informed choice, and perhaps abandon their current technology for another technology. In time, you might even get enough people to come over to this other technology that that community is big enough to support that technology as a valid alternative to the "bad" technology. But what if everyone just stfu'ed about what their "negative" thoughts are on a technology? Would that other technology be able to get enough "acolytes" in order to be a viable alternative? Probably not, because everyone was too "positive" and polite to point out how that technology might be better than the old technology.

Would JS even be so controversial if it wasn't for that it is so entrenched in Web development? Is that not a great example of how important mindshare can be?

Re: The Birth and Death of JavaScript [video]

#200

I guess this is in a way a response to Bret Victor's "The Future of Programming"? https://vimeo.com/71278954

Thanks for link. Liked the 70s vibe and humour. From about 14:40 he gets animated, basically conducting! Would love to know a programmer's explanation for the function or purpose of arm waving and hand signals in a presentation. Not knocking, just curious!

Well, he just tries to reinforce that we have two symmetrical interconnected systems and yet they have to figure out how to talk to each other. What he has on the screen.
Post reply on HN