Douglas Crockford on JavaScript
digest.browsertech.com
Douglas Crockford on JavaScript
1–10 of 202 posts
Re: Douglas Crockford on JavaScript
#2> "[...] we are crushing ourselves with the accumulated complexity we’ve piled on top of bad foundations [...]"
The same could be said about plain HTML/CSS though. I think the author is correct overall and I don't really see improvement on the horizon. WebAssembly, while great that it exists, can morph browsers into some poor mans virtual operating system and this can lead to a less open web.
We already see more closed Platforms like Discord. I use it too, the product is completely fine, but it sucks in information that isn't availble on the open net if you don't go through the platform. Some communities exclusively use it and they get little discoverability through web searches. Sure, this isn't really related to Javascript/Webassembly, just a development I fear will increase and which could be accelerated with different approaches to languages.
A front-end scripting language available in every browser is very, very useful. I think few new languages could replace it here, I don't know of any at least. And I think a lot of flexibility is lost if you begin to transpile anthing into Javascript. Granted, for large projects it is pretty much a requirement to do so at some point.
Re: Douglas Crockford on JavaScript
#3> "[...] we are crushing ourselves with the accumulated complexity we’ve piled on top of bad foundations [...]" The same could be said about plain HTML/CSS though. I think the author is correct overall and I don't really see improvement on the horizon. WebAssembly, while great that it exists, can morph browsers into some poor mans virtual operating system and this can lead to a less open web. We already see more clos…
Worse than trying to replace it entirely is that you just end up with two implementations that need to be maintained.
Re: Douglas Crockford on JavaScript
#4Most of boilerplate code i wrote is mapping data structures between API standards. None of the is related to javascript. So i won't stop using javascript.
Re: Douglas Crockford on JavaScript
#5First we need a good alternative. JavaScript may not be the best, but it works well.
Re: Douglas Crockford on JavaScript
#6Ok show me another language which has near native performance, gradual typing (thinking TypeScript here), and lets me do lightweight functional and lightweight OO programming.
Re: Douglas Crockford on JavaScript
#7[flagged]
Re: Douglas Crockford on JavaScript
#8Ok show me another language which has near native performance, gradual typing (thinking TypeScript here), and lets me do lightweight functional and lightweight OO programming.
How about Dart/Flutter?
Re: Douglas Crockford on JavaScript
#9> "[...] we are crushing ourselves with the accumulated complexity we’ve piled on top of bad foundations [...]" The same could be said about plain HTML/CSS though. I think the author is correct overall and I don't really see improvement on the horizon. WebAssembly, while great that it exists, can morph browsers into some poor mans virtual operating system and this can lead to a less open web. We already see more clos…
> [closed platforms] will increase and which could be accelerated with different approaches to languages.
the business incentive is towards such closed platforms - data and platform ownership has value after all. It makes zero sense for a business to keep a platform open and potentially help a competitor.
Re: Douglas Crockford on JavaScript
#10What is one of those 'really clean' languages that we should be using then?
I'm interested!