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

It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)

javascript.tm

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 393 posts

Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)

#131

Post by GaryBluto »

some_furry wrote: post #118
GaryBluto wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't care about most ridiculous "battles" people are trying to wage, let alone this one, I was bluntly saying there are better things to spend money on if you do wish to "win battles". You're allowed to criticize things without offering a solution, especially if you don't care all that much about the topic at hand. As a sidenote, Regarding your comment on my perceived lack of pragmatism, I'd point you to a definit…

[flagged]

Because as we all know, quantity is better than quality.

Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)

#132

Post by brabel »

embedding-shape wrote: post #42
suyash wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The irony is I belive the JavaScript creator wtnted to latch to Java's popularity to called it JavaScript and now both Java and JavaScript are owned by Oracle and they want the name but not want to change is to ECMAScript, it's real official name.

> and now both Java and JavaScript are owned by "Now" makes it sound like this is a recent acquisition of the JavaScript trademark. Oracle obtained it in 2009 as a result of the Sun purchase and if I remember correctly, Sun initially was issued the trademark back in the 90s sometimes.

You should consider reading the article.

Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)

#133

Post by someguyiguess »

sph wrote: post #36
stuartjohnson12 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apart from anything else, ECMAScript is a mouthful! Eeh-cee-emm-ay-script. Five syllables.

It should've been called AcmeScript. The association with Wile E. Coyote would've been fitting.

That’s actually the perfect name for it!

Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)

#134

Post by Octoth0rpe »

nacozarina wrote: post #21
siwatanejo wrote: post #3

I actually think that people should rather use EcmaScript name instead of JavaScript, because it's a way better name (much less confusing, given that this lang doesn't have anything to do with Java anyway). I wish Oracle started suing people to force everyone to use the better name.

Our trade has a solid tradition of terrible names for programming languages. They are ALL bad. The whole Ekmuhscrip.js schism fits perfectly. Yes, this is our circus, and these are our monkeys.

> Yes, this is our circus, and these are our monkeys.

In this case, it's Oracle's circus and we are the monkeys.

Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)

#135

Post by moralestapia »

phantasmish wrote: post #106
cubefox wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Of course over time everyone abandoned applets because of all the security problems, Haha, or because it froze the whole browser for a few seconds upon loading. Unlike Macromedia Flash by the way.

I had a flash ad take 100% of my cpu back around 2005 or so. It wasn’t even trying to be malicious, just a poorly made ad. That was the day I stopped allowing any site exceptions in my ad blocker. Of course 100% of that cpu is probably 1/10 of one core on any of my modern machines, so an ordinary and not-broken ad laden page routinely eats several times as many cycles now. Progress!

Websites can also use 100% of your CPU as well.

You might not be aware, but this is a trivial thing to do.

Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)

#137

Post by psychoslave »

siwatanejo wrote: post #3

I actually think that people should rather use EcmaScript name instead of JavaScript, because it's a way better name (much less confusing, given that this lang doesn't have anything to do with Java anyway). I wish Oracle started suing people to force everyone to use the better name.

That’s not retrocompatible with all the .js files out there though.

One possibility is thus just make some vocalic derivation, which align with well known spontaneous evolution of languages like ablaut[1]. Following that, and keeping the dance connotation, jive[2] is an option. Or closer on phonetic distance to java (/ˈd͡ʒɑː.və/), there is jovial (/ˈd͡ʒəʊ.vɪ.əl/ or /ˈd͡ʒoʊ.vɪ.əl/ or /ˈd͡ʒoʊ.vəl/)[3].

Might our jovial·script enjoy our life.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_ablaut

[2] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/jive

[3] https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/jovial

Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)

#138

Post by someguyiguess »

jacquesm wrote: post #81
analogears wrote: post #65

Speaking of JavaScript's evolution - I've been building a music player (muz11.com) and it's remarkable how far we've come. The Web Audio API, MediaSession for lock screen controls, smooth animations via requestAnimationFrame... all running client-side with no framework, just vanilla JS. Thirty years ago this would have required a desktop app and probably a record label deal. The irony is that 'freeing' JavaScript fro…

> Thirty years ago this would have required a desktop app and probably a record label deal. And that would have been just fine.

Until you have to pay back your advance to the record label.

Re: It’s time to free JavaScript (2024)

#139

Post by giancarlostoro »

siwatanejo wrote: post #3

I actually think that people should rather use EcmaScript name instead of JavaScript, because it's a way better name (much less confusing, given that this lang doesn't have anything to do with Java anyway). I wish Oracle started suing people to force everyone to use the better name.

I am going to sound crazy, but, if Microsoft would free up TypeScript and every browser added native TypeScript features to JavaScript… and then we all just started calling it TypeScript. Maybe? Then you would see native ts files. Oracle will never give up JS. The funny thing is the number of people who confuse Java and JS.
Post reply on HN