1. Its most used by number of users(web pages)
2. Its most actively developed.
3. Its has massive codebases.
4. There a huge incentive to improve and extend JavaScript.
5. It allows full range of programming paradigms and methods.
6. Its very easy to learn, new users appear to be proficient in weeks.
7.Notably there are companion technologies like HTML5/Canvas/</Video> which will synergize with future JavaScript to dominate the web.
8. JavaScript is stable. No browser would dare to break millions of pages, in a quest to "improve functional purity", "fix syntax" or something equally asinine like C++ compatibility.
Name:
FrozenVoid2010-07-04 1:34
>1. Its most used by number of users(web pages)
Visual Basic is pretty popular too.
>2. Its most actively developed.
By what measure? There plenty of languages in active development which change weekly. Which does not improve quality much. You wouldn't want to beta-test JavaScript engines too.
>3.Its has massive codebases.
A drop in the C/C++/Java ocean.
>4. There a huge incentive to improve and extend JavaScript.
Not much because you can break compatibility. They mainly improve speed & memory. The fancy python/ruby features are only called with special syntax.
>5.It allows full range of programming paradigms and methods.
Its possible to write them, but the syntax is ugly, convoluted and it has no concept of native datatypes. JavaScript is not general purpose enough, despite Google efforts.
>7.Notably there are companion technologies like HTML5/Canvas/</Video> which will synergize with future JavaScript to dominate the web.
They are still beta quality solutions, which lose in speed and features to Flash/plugins. There is no common standard/codecs people can rely on now.
>8. JavaScript is stable. No browser would dare to break millions of pages, in a quest to "improve functional purity", "fix syntax" or something equally asinine like C++ compatibility.
Someone never programmed JavaScript seriously. Mozilla and MS both break syntax and introduce bugs every release. Its just not noticeable with more stable versions, but JavaScript engines are full of bugs, random memory leaks and browser-only extensions/syntax.
Fair comparision:
1. More expressive then Sepples/Lisp (unless you write huge libraries). Nearly as expressive as Python/Ruby(JS1.8+newer versions).
2. Very convenient to use. No easy to debug though.
3. Very fast(in realm of scripting languages) due effort spent on JIT optimizations, but sucks in memory use.
>>8
>definition of expressivity
Lines of codes per equivalent program written from scratch.
__________________
Orbis terrarum delenda est
Name:
Anonymous2010-07-04 4:14
>>9
Have you read your ``On the Expressive Power of Programming Languages'' today?
Name:
FrozenVoid2010-07-04 4:27
>On the Expressive Power of Programming Languages
Computer science has nothing to do with practical coding.
You don't need a PhD in type theory to write a compiler/regex parser/toy os.Expressive (compositional) power of modern language is nearly the same(exception some esoteric BDSM-based systems). What is different is the amount of code required to port abstraction from language A to language B.