Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Java's Crypt

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 12:24

Javascript is surprisingly quirky for such a hyped language.  Even Python has less quirks.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 12:26

It was made in ~10 days by a mediocre intern. What did you expect?

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 12:38

>>2
he could have used Lisp instead.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 13:16

>>2
Less penetration and hype

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 13:33

Widgets midgets

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 16:07

all languages have quirks. would you rather deal with space leaks?

Name: Over 9000 2012-09-21 16:12

This thread has over 9000 posts. You can't reply anymore.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 17:33

>>3
Actually, the original scripting language embedded in a (Netscape) browser was going to be Scheme (or Scheme-like). Then they decided to that the language should have a C-like syntax and prototype based OO. True story.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 17:42

>>8
s/\(decided\) to/\1/

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 17:54

>>8
they decided they needed a "lisp" that lacks literally everything that makes lisp good; anything it doesn't lack is half-assed. also, the massive es6 circlejerk around features that most languages have had for years. i can't wait to see how those get fucked up! the same people who came up with ASI and the most absurd weak typing i have ever seen

instead of a language that had been around for decades and already had established implementations, they instead wrote a pile of shit in 10 days and now it is being hyped as the language of the future. people are getting excited over a rehashed idea just because it can do more than pop-ups now

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 18:20

Dubs

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 18:31

people are getting excited over a rehashed idea just because it can do more than pop-ups now
People hate reforms and clean breaks. Dragging shit out and making it better by small increments is always has the upper hand over reforms in people's minds. Also, installed base, user base, etc. Javascript had a much bigger chance of being displaced if it weren't for jQuery (which is more than a small increment of better, I must say) and the like. In fact, if jQuery were spun off into its own browser scripting language, Javascript would be history. That's how shit evolves in tech, most of the time.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 18:33

>>12
s/is \(always has\)/\1/

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 18:51

>>12
It was over the day the first popup ad was written. Browser makers simply could not drop support for this half-baked language as its use, even for menial things, was too widespread, and you can't just break the web overnight.

Now they have to face the hurdle of agreeing on a decent VM to ship alongside Javascript until it dies off in 10 years, when nobody will care about the crusty old pages which still use it. And you won't be able to use a decent language without ``compiling'' to JS for a couple of years after that.

Corporate users will still be stuck with IE 6, though.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 19:17

>>12
Nope. The thing about JS that you guys don't understand is the prototype model with lambdas gives it the flexibility to be anything it needs. If jQuery came first as some sort of platform on its own (without those qualities), JS would still be as disruptive as otherwise.

People target JS partly because they think they can provide a better language (nothing wrong with DSLs and such), but all of those projects are only so successful because of the flexibility of the target. Don't like the semantics for something? Mess with its protos. Once you're happy with the semantics: emit code. That's all there is to it.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 19:23

>>15
Also, most of what's bad about Javascript is actually not about the language at all. It's mostly about shitty or incomplete DOM implementations (not to mention DOM's inherent ugliness) and an incredibly bare-bones ``standard library''.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 19:26

(not to mention DOM's inherent ugliness)
the pleasure of being SGMLed inside

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 19:31

They should have kept the name Livescript. Must marketing shitheads soil everything touch?

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 19:35

>>16
and an incredibly bare-bones ``standard library''.

Yeah... http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/4009#comment-60781

(Lots of good stuff in that thread.)

The short version of that story (as told by Eich himself istr) is: the standard library was implemented in 10 days.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 19:49

>>16
scoping issues, this, lack of operator overloading, semicolon insertion, retarded coercion rules, module support not part of the core, etc. also, "portable". yes, with native you have to port to other platforms; with javascript you have to port to different browsers, each with their own subset of javascript and their own vm/jit with its own runtime characteristics and god knows what else. keycodes? have fun!

all that has fuck all to do with the DOM and is what people bitch about all the time. yes, some of those are proposed to be fixed in harmony... when is the release date on that again?

really, when a language needs a "good parts" book, there is something wrong with it

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 19:54

>>20
You seem to have too many informed opinions to be a web developer. Do you just hate Javascript on principle?

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 20:06

>>21
i hate it because there are so many better languages you CAN'T use in the browser without js being involved one way or another

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 20:14

>>21-22
Informed perhaps, but also biased:

·Coercion is notoriously bad in dynamic languages.
·Semicolons aren't an issue (hell, people put up with what Go does, which will actually bite you in the ass in practice.)
·The incompatibilities are overstated (i.e. are a matter of standards conformance—you can't blame JSES for that, no matter what language is being implemented, it's just as likely to happen.)
·Operator Overloading Considered [spoiler]Queastionable At Best[spoiler]. Every language with operator overloading or templates needs a "good parts" book.

The scoping issue is bad, but at least there's lexical scope. Always use it. Namespacing is possible and not hard (or: it can be hard if you want it to be hard.) I've heard people complain about this but it never bothered me. Yes it's weird.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 20:15

>>22
What about NaCL?

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 20:16

scoping issues
this
semicolon insertion
retarded coercion rules
Those are pretty stupid, but encountered rarely enough to be a minor annoyance at worst.

lack of operator overloading
Operator overloading is not a good thing.

module support not part of the core
http://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-55/srfi-55.html

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 21:49

javascript was meant to be a forgiving and permissive language due to the fact that it is a browser language and so it was designed to try and make sense out of bad programming. this permissiveness also makes it somewhat quirky, which is ok considering what it is used for

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-21 21:54

>>26
fact that it is a browser language
which is ok considering what it is used for
apparently not just the browser anymore!

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-24 5:44

While most of these cases make sense, the first one is to be considered another mis-design of the language because it never has any practical use.

Foo.method = function() {
    function test() {
        // this is set to the global object
    }
    test();
}


A common misconception is that this inside of test refers to Foo; while in fact, it does not.

In order to gain access to Foo from within test, it is necessary to create a local variable inside of method which refers to Foo.

Foo.method = function() {
    var that = this;
    function test() {
        // Use that instead of this here
    }
    test();
}

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-24 5:56

>>28
Did you mean Foo.prototype.method ?
Also, that is hideously obvious. this always refers to the object the method was called on, i.e. that in that.test(). test() by itself uses the default (global) namespace.
also, var self = this is so common that Vim's default JS syntax highlights self as a keyword.

>>12
jQuery is shit bloat and ender's many modules are far superior

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-24 6:07

>>29
s/namespace/context/

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-24 6:12

Alan Kay - JEW
Lev Vygotsky - JEW
Seymour Papert - JEW
Jean Piaget - JEW or HALF-JEW
Jerome Bruner - JEW
Noam Chomsky - JEW
John McCarthy - JEW
Karl Popper - JEW
Marvin Minsky - JEW
Terry Winograd - JEW
Gerald Sussman - JEW
Donald Knuth - JEW
Niklaus Wirth - JEW
Brendan Eich (inventor of JavaScript) - JEW
Andrei Alexandrescu (inventor of D) - JEW
Guid van Rossum (inventor of Python) - HALF-JEW
Andi Gutmans and Zeev Suraski (inventors of PHP) - JEWS
Jean David Ichbiah (inventor of Ada) - JEW
Bertrand Meyer (inventor of Eiffel) - JEW

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-24 6:17

>>31
Alan Jay Perlis, Charles Katz (inventors of Algol) - JEWS

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-24 6:19

Alan Kay (caricatural Irish guy) is not a Jew. Donald Knuth (Viking name) is not a Jew.
Fuck you.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-24 6:21

The arguments object is not an Array. While it has some of the semantics of an array - namely the length property - it does not inherit from Array.prototype and is in fact an Object.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-24 6:22

John McCarthy is not jewish, neither is Brenden Eich, I doubt Alan Kay is

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-24 6:26

>>35
He is. Look at his photo.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCarthy_%28computer_scientist%29
Lithuanian Jewish immigrant mother

Also,
Philip Greenspun - JEW

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-24 6:28

Jean Piaget: not Jew, not CS-related

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-24 6:28

>>33
Typical eastern european kike:
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%BB:EvgeniLeonov.jpg

Donald Knuth:
https://www.student.cs.uwaterloo.ca/~cs462/Hall/knuth.gif

Sorry, Knuth is Jewish or has Jewish ancestry.

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-24 6:29

Knuth and Kay are not fucking Jews!

Name: Anonymous 2012-09-24 6:31

>>37
You, Europeans, just have a different definition of a Jew...

In France, I’m Russian, and in Russia, I’m a Jew. In France, a Jew is someone who wears a yarmulke, goes to synagogue. If you don’t do these things, you are some other kind of person. But I’ll tell you: My social circle in France, the people I hang out with, is becoming more and more Jewish. There’s some kind of self-selection going on. You gravitate to your own. -- Pavel Lungin, Russian-Jewish filmmaker

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List