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

Proposal: JavaScript Structs

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 371 posts

Re: Proposal: JavaScript Structs

#101

Post by i007 »

// Step 1: Convert JSON object to string const jsonObject = { name: "John", age: 30 }; const jsonString = JSON.stringify(jsonObject);

// Step 2: Convert the string to binary data const encoder = new TextEncoder(); const encodedJson = encoder.encode(jsonString);

// Step 3: Create a SharedArrayBuffer and a Uint8Array view const sharedArrayBuffer = new SharedArrayBuffer(encodedJson.length); const sharedArray = new Uint8Array(sharedArrayBuffer);

// Step 4: Store the encoded data in the SharedArrayBuffer sharedArray.set(encodedJson);

Now you can use Atomics, no?

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Refe...

Re: Proposal: JavaScript Structs

#102

Post by girvo »

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #64
leetharris wrote: post #18

I am not sure how to really refine this thought I have had, but I have this fear that every language eventually gets so bloated and complicated that it has a huge barrier to entry. The ones that stand out the most to me are C# and Typescript. Microsoft has a large team dedicated towards improving these languages constantly and instead of exclusively focusing on making them easier to use or more performant, they are c…

Javascript is not simple AT ALL. It has 3 ways to declare functions, multiple variations on arrow functions syntax, a weird prototyping inheritance system, objects you can create out of "new" on functions, object literals that can act an pseudo-classes, classes, decorators, for-i loop + maps + filter + for-in loop (with hasOwn) + forEach, async / await + promises and an invisible but always-on event loop, objects pro…

In fact, Javascript is so complex that one of the seminal books on it was specifically "The Good Parts", cutting down the scope of it to just the parts of the language that were considered decent and useful.

Re: Proposal: JavaScript Structs

#103

Post by hsbauauvhabzb »

lelandfe wrote: post #92
leetharris wrote: post #18

I am not sure how to really refine this thought I have had, but I have this fear that every language eventually gets so bloated and complicated that it has a huge barrier to entry. The ones that stand out the most to me are C# and Typescript. Microsoft has a large team dedicated towards improving these languages constantly and instead of exclusively focusing on making them easier to use or more performant, they are c…

It doesn't help how arcane the TS documentation is. Important docs live as frozen-in-amber changelog entries; huge tracts of pages "deprecated" yet still #1 on Google. Google "typescript interfaces." #1 is a page that has been deprecated for years. How did this happen?

AWS has that issue too - v1 documentation takes precedence over v2, the same with bootstrap, too. I suspect google algorithms don’t quite understand deprecation / latest version prioritisation.

Re: Proposal: JavaScript Structs

#104

Post by johnfn »

munificent wrote: post #76
leetharris wrote: post #18

I am not sure how to really refine this thought I have had, but I have this fear that every language eventually gets so bloated and complicated that it has a huge barrier to entry. The ones that stand out the most to me are C# and Typescript. Microsoft has a large team dedicated towards improving these languages constantly and instead of exclusively focusing on making them easier to use or more performant, they are c…

I've been meaning to write a longer essay on this for years, but I believe the reason for this observation is different cohorts. Imagine you are a C# programmer just as C# 1.0 is released. C# is a fairly simple language at that time (and similar to other languages you already know), so you can get caught up on it fairly easily and quickly. A few years later, C# 2.0 comes out. It's got a handful of features, but not t…

Something about OP didn't strike me quite right, but your explanation here really nails it, I think. Especially because I can see that I'm in quite an old JS cohort - and quite happy with the language as a result - but if I were to start coding in JS yesterday I think I would gnash my teeth and tear out my hair.

Re: Proposal: JavaScript Structs

#105

Post by MathMonkeyMan »

leetharris wrote: post #18

I am not sure how to really refine this thought I have had, but I have this fear that every language eventually gets so bloated and complicated that it has a huge barrier to entry. The ones that stand out the most to me are C# and Typescript. Microsoft has a large team dedicated towards improving these languages constantly and instead of exclusively focusing on making them easier to use or more performant, they are c…

What did Bjarne Stroustrup supposedly say? There are two kinds of programming languages: the ones everybody complains about, and the ones nobody uses.

I'll put on my Scheme hat and say "with hygienic macros, people can add whichever language features they want." Maybe Rust is a good experiment along those lines: C++ with hygienic macros.

Everything that people keep using grows into a monster of complexity: programming languages, software, operating systems, law. You must maintain backward compatibility, and the urge to add a new feature is too great. There's a cost with moving to the new thing -- let's just put the new thing in the old thing.

Re: Proposal: JavaScript Structs

#106

Post by GordonS »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #95
eddd-ddde wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why always say the true beginner programming language is C. Stupid easy to learn, have some loops, have some conditions, make some memory allocations. You will learn about the fundamentals of computing as well, which you might as well ignore (unknowingly) if you start with something like JavaScript (where is this data living in my computer?).

The problem with C is that beginners generally want to build something. "Oh, you want to build an app that does X? Well, first learn C for three months and then switch to Python/Javascript/etc. to build the thing that motivated you in the first place" doesn't fly.

Aye, especially nowadays with the ubiquity of computing - "hello world", or console apps in general, aren't the most enticing of projects anymore.

Re: Proposal: JavaScript Structs

#107

Post by azangru »

leetharris wrote: post #18

I am not sure how to really refine this thought I have had, but I have this fear that every language eventually gets so bloated and complicated that it has a huge barrier to entry. The ones that stand out the most to me are C# and Typescript. Microsoft has a large team dedicated towards improving these languages constantly and instead of exclusively focusing on making them easier to use or more performant, they are c…

> it has a huge barrier to entry

You don't have to use every feature of the language. Especially not when you are just learning.

> Now, Typescript is on version 5.6 and there is so much stuff you can do with it that it's overwhelming. And nobody uses most of it!

Exactly. But no-one seems to be arguing that typescript has a huge barrier to entry.

Re: Proposal: JavaScript Structs

#108

Post by thot_experiment »

hinkley wrote: post #80
thot_experiment wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but there's absolutely no reason to use var any more Naw, var has function scope and hoisting, both of which are useful.

My job isn't to be infatuated with your code. It's to get through your code and get stories done. People don't really get better at handling the complexity of large code bases. We are fundamentally the same organic matter that existed prior to the first computer coming into existence. So as code bases and library bases grow larger and larger, they need to be proportionately easier to read or even ignore. Your code ne…

Sure and I'd accept the weaker claim that "there's no reason to use var in a production codebase touched by many people"

Re: Proposal: JavaScript Structs

#109

Post by otteromkram »

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #64
leetharris wrote: post #18

I am not sure how to really refine this thought I have had, but I have this fear that every language eventually gets so bloated and complicated that it has a huge barrier to entry. The ones that stand out the most to me are C# and Typescript. Microsoft has a large team dedicated towards improving these languages constantly and instead of exclusively focusing on making them easier to use or more performant, they are c…

Javascript is not simple AT ALL. It has 3 ways to declare functions, multiple variations on arrow functions syntax, a weird prototyping inheritance system, objects you can create out of "new" on functions, object literals that can act an pseudo-classes, classes, decorators, for-i loop + maps + filter + for-in loop (with hasOwn) + forEach, async / await + promises and an invisible but always-on event loop, objects pro…

JavaScript is simple in comparison to other languages. Not many people would disagree.
Post reply on HN