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

JavaScript at 20

brendaneich.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 327 posts

Re: JavaScript at 20

#101

Post by rjsw »

teacup50 wrote: post #57
knightofmars wrote: post #40

"Haters gonna hate." Anyone claiming that JS is the "worst thing to happen to the web" and/or that some other language would miraculously solve all of the problems present in JS should do the following, "Go create it." Don't whine about the barriers and how a new language would never be adopted because "JS is already everywhere." There are plenty of people already trying to solve this problem by actively doing someth…

There are no end of alternatives out there today, from mobile platforms to research languages exploring a myriad of aspects of computer science. Just let me know when browser vendors are going to break down the two-tiered system, and let us run the legion of alternatives alongside -- instead of under -- JavaScript. Or, they could take their own medicine, and try and write the browser in JS.

Internet Explorer had a pretty clean API for adding extra scripting languages.

Re: JavaScript at 20

#102

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

gohrt wrote: post #87
bitL wrote: post #18

I wish JavaScript "committed a teenager suicide" and we finally got a more sane language for the web. It's startling how much energy is spent to work around its bad design every day and it's not getting any better, people are just getting used to it (which is akin to voluntarily agree with having most of one's brain blown off). Even seeing Brendan showing off that he hacked the language in 10 days makes me sick to th…

This post, like JavaScript, is an utterly horrible way to express an idea.

Quite offensive and hurtful, too. "teenager suicide"?!

Re: JavaScript at 20

#104

Post by jessaustin »

M8 wrote: post #8

I just wish the best language would win, not the accidentally ubiquitous one. And giving a real choice of language would been even better.

Well, at least Java didn't win. Those not old enough to remember "applets" may not know how lucky they are. Eich deserves credit for all sorts of things, but not least for saving us from that. And who knows what scripting languages the browsers of tomorrow might support?

Re: JavaScript at 20

#106

Post by comex »

nostrademons wrote: post #96
mattmanser wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Works on OSes. We have a choice. In browsers, the OSes of the web, nope, just a bad language designed in 10 days that resists all attempts to make it not bad. It doesn't really matter if you like javascript, there's so many people who don't. Why do you get to dictate whether we can or can't develop on the web? You leave us with a horrible choice, use what we consider to be one of the worst modern languages, or not de…

It doesn't actually work on (GUI) OSes - there is a strong incentive to write your app in the language and framework that is native to the platform, because you're asking for a lot of pain and a substandard customer experience otherwise. You write your Windows apps in C# and .NET. You write your Android apps in Java. You write your iOS apps in Objective-C, and now Swift. You write your Gnome apps in C with Gtk+, and…

(Including Apple; the rule to the contrary didn't last very long after its introduction a few years ago.)

Re: JavaScript at 20

#107

Post by garfij »

gohrt wrote: post #85
codewithcheese wrote: post #12

I have learnt that if I click a javascript post and see a title and author slash screen and nothing else apparently I must start using my right arrow button.

What if I don't have a right-arrow button? Keyboards are not standard equipment in non-text-entry contexts.

Then you swipe.

Re: JavaScript at 20

#108

Post by LittleDan »

For background on the user-defined operators and literals idea for ES7, see this: http://www.slideshare.net/BrendanEich/value-objects (it took me a little while to find; it hasn't been as prominent in recent discussions as the other items). I'm excited to see all the progress Javascript is making!

Re: JavaScript at 20

#109

Post by jessaustin »

simfoo wrote: post #7
Dirlewanger wrote: post #4

Cool presentation, but holy shit, taking ~2 minutes to load on FF and freezing the browser is not.

Welcome to the modern web, where bad technologies (JS, HTTP, CSS and others) are developed to the max and declared modern despite always remaining bad technologies

Yeah I liked the web better before HTTP... wat? Are you a gopher fan?

Re: JavaScript at 20

#110

Post by to3m »

hinkley wrote: post #56
bitL wrote: post #18

I wish JavaScript "committed a teenager suicide" and we finally got a more sane language for the web. It's startling how much energy is spent to work around its bad design every day and it's not getting any better, people are just getting used to it (which is akin to voluntarily agree with having most of one's brain blown off). Even seeing Brendan showing off that he hacked the language in 10 days makes me sick to th…

I struggle with a couple different tools that were developed in weeks or a couple months or on a plane ride. Every time these guys brag about how quickly they put together the first version I just want to say to them, "yeah, we can all tell. And every day we suffer for it."

Yes. There's just no substitute for time. It's impressive to see something put together quickly, but the result is inevitably lacking in some (or more) ways.

In this talk, I couldn't decide whether his saying JS was written in ten days was a rueful admission that it's only natural for it to be a huge pile of shit, or some self-aggrandizement based on how quickly he managed to write it. I always found JS rather tasteless, so, naturally predisposed to think somewhat uncharitably of its author, I'm going to assume it's self-aggrandizement. This might be a bit rude of me, but if it's OK to rush out JS then slowly make it ever so slightly better over the next 20 years, then I think it's OK for me to form my opinions in the same manner ;)

Post reply on HN