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

181–190 of 327 posts

Re: JavaScript at 20

#181

Post by sjrd »

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #164
cozuya wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deprecating == is probably a good step. Or better yet just turning == into === and removing that. That would cause some chaos thats for sure...

They don't have to remove anything, just repeat what they did with "use strict" but make it, uhh, even stricter. Just a subset of JS which is only the good parts. Actually "use strict" actually makes JS an almost good language as mistakes are immediately flagged rather than "working anyway." But strict mode doesn't go nearly far enough in my opinion. I will say for backwards compatibility you're always going to have…

It seems "use strong" is for you. https://developers.google.com/v8/experiments

Re: JavaScript at 20

#182

Post by erokar »

frik wrote: post #122

Edit2: When do you switch off your transpiler and serve native ES6? In 2020? Original: What do you do in 2017? What if you already code in ES6 and transpile it to JS5 at the moment. Do you simply switch from serving JS5 to JS6? Older browsers (todays current browser) don't support "class", "let" and other new syntax constructs. The just fail with JS errors. Can one browse the web with IE11 and iOS 8 Safari in 2017? (…

> When do you switch off your transpiler and serve native ES6? In 2020?

Never, probably. Why would you? When most browsers support ES6 you would want to write in ES7, or 8, or TypeScript, or CoffeeScript, or — most likely — in some new exciting language that will transpile to JS.

Re: JavaScript at 20

#183

Post by ForHackernews »

pcwalton wrote: post #78
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…

> Works on OSes. We have a choice. The kernel doesn't have a DOM. On the Web, the number of GC'd objects that every "process" has to deal with exceeds the number of file descriptors by an order of magnitude. Also, you do have a choice: you can compile your favorite language to JS, even low-level ones via asm.js. > Why do you get to dictate whether we can or can't develop on the web? You leave us with a horrible choic…

Semi-serious question: Other than backwards compatibility, do browsers need to have a DOM? It seems like many web app devs spend more time fighting against the DOM than working with it. Why not just make the browser expose a generic GUI model? Let web devs interact with Webkit or QT directly?

Re: JavaScript at 20

#184

Post by krat0sprakhar »

iyn wrote: post #137

If you're interested in learning ES6 basics in 20 minutes, this is a great starting point: https://github.com/lukehoban/es6features Check out this repo, if you have a "little more" free time: https://github.com/ericdouglas/ES6-Learning To be honest, I used to dislike JS not so long ago - it was hard to debug, I had to use strange conventions to write OO code etc. But after learning more about the ES6, react/flux, nod…

Let me just latch on this comment to recommend Nicholas Zakas' book on ES6 - https://leanpub.com/understandinges6/read

Will take you a weekend to read at the max and it's well worth the effort.

Re: JavaScript at 20

#185

Post by drawkbox »

Interesting the Date object was a direct port from java.util.Date. It always felt a little out of place in terms of style in early javascript and this is why.

ES6 is awesome and there are so many good things happening in it. I was always a little irked that ES4 (ActionScript 3 was built on it) that had some of these elements was nixed for ES5 like typing, extending and cleaner events.

Great overview and I picked up a few things I have missed in js advancements like string handling changes (startsWith, endsWith, trim), templating with `, multiline strings!, extend, math functions, arrow, default/rest params, octal/binary literals and tons more. Many of these are probably in everyone's js libs but nice to have them standard.

I am most excited for asm.js of all due to the WebGL and gaming/app performance impact that will make when fully integrated in all browsers this year. asm.js and WebGL gaming is already giving benefit to performance in Javscript and added typed arrays to ES6.

Also in his 90's TV pic, how could you forget Seinfeld?

Re: JavaScript at 20

#186

Post by cgag »

wil421 wrote: post #50
sker wrote: post #23

I never understood why HN likes slideshows so much. Am I the only one who finds them completely, 100% useless without the audio of the presentation?

I didnt even realize it was a slideshow. No arrows or icons you can click to go to the next/previous slide and nothing on the website saying its a slideshow. Thanks for your comment. After I read it I went back and clicked an arrow key and the cubeshow started.

Arrow keys just scroll around for me, I can't see any slides but the first.

Thanks javascript.

Re: JavaScript at 20

#187

Post by solarexplorer »

stickperson wrote: post #173
iyn wrote: post #137

If you're interested in learning ES6 basics in 20 minutes, this is a great starting point: https://github.com/lukehoban/es6features Check out this repo, if you have a "little more" free time: https://github.com/ericdouglas/ES6-Learning To be honest, I used to dislike JS not so long ago - it was hard to debug, I had to use strange conventions to write OO code etc. But after learning more about the ES6, react/flux, nod…

What other resources did you use? I'm slowly working my way though Programming JavaScript Applications.

I use the (soon to be) language standard as a reference: http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=harmony:specification...

Re: JavaScript at 20

#188

Post by olau »

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…

I sometimes wish Javascript would take more hints from Python in getting some of the details right. For instance, it would be nice if == would work so that ["foo"] == ["foo"] and { foo: 1 } == { foo: 1}. But I suppose fixing that would be a too bold move.

I like Javascript, in many ways it's a neat little language, but manipulating the small little ad-hoc data structures (arrays and hashes, and combinations of them) that seems to be half of most programming tasks is definitely a step backwards compared to Python.

Re: JavaScript at 20

#189

Post by phpnode »

outworlder wrote: post #67

Oh yeah, great, many new features. But could you please fix the damn boolean logic? And while at it, get rid of most implicit conversions. Or forget all those features and bake in a macro system, so that we can fix anything without having to wait for the next ES[N] standard to get adopted.

Macros for JavaScript have been available for a long time[0], you can even use the C preprocessor[1]. Also I wrote a macro plugin for babel just yesterday [2]

[0] http://sweetjs.org/

[1] http://www.nongnu.org/espresso/js-cpp.html

[2] https://github.com/codemix/babel-plugin-macros

Post reply on HN