3 ms·

The author of imba has some problems understanding languages vs frameworks/libraries. I quote: "Imba is a new programming language for the web that compiles

by TeeWEE 11y ago

The author of imba has some problems understanding languages vs frameworks/libraries. I quote: "Imba is a new programming language for the web that compiles to performant and readable JavaScript." Ok, so i understand Imba is a language spec with an implementation that compiles to javascript. "It has language level support for defining, extending, subclassing, instantiating and rendering dom nodes." Ok so there is special syntax to create DOM elements. Nothing new here. Its just syntax over javascript. What can be done with imba, can be done with vanilla javascript. "it is more than 20 times faster than React" Wait, what? React is a javascript library, not a programming language. Written in javascript.... How can Imba be faster? Does Imba also include a dom-diffing algorithm.. If so, why would you built that into the language... Woudnt it be better to write a library in imba-lang that can do dom diffing? I'm lost here.

judofyr 11y ago
> Does Imba also include a dom-diffing algorithm Yes. > Woudnt it be better to write a library in imba-lang that can do dom diffing? It is: https://github.com/somebee/imba/blob/master/src/imba/dom.static.imba https://github.com/somebee/imba/blob/master/src/imba/dom.sta.... It's a required runtime library if you want to use the tag syntax. The difference between "language" and "core library" is always a bit mushy. For instance, the JavaScript doesn't only specify the semantics of operations, but also the main objects (String, Array, etc) and a set of functions (push, pop, indexOf, etc). In the sense that JavaScript ships with default objects for dealing with Arrays and Strings, Imba ships with default classes for dealing with tags and DOM elements. Yes, we could say that tags should just be sugar syntax over regular function calls (which it actually is) and move the DOM diffing out of "Imba". But really, the main point about Imba is the tag functionality and we believe we only need one good implementation.
pc2g4d 11y ago
I think they were comparing based on the performance of a simple application: "For a semi-complex application like TodoMVC, it is more than 20 times faster than React with less code, and a much smaller library." I think the comparison makes sense because Imba seems to imply a lightweight framework. At least, the generated code in the examples on the front page references a `t$` function, which has to come from somewhere.
nostrademons 11y ago
There's no rule that says the language/library/framework divide has to lie where contemporary scripting languages put it. In PHP and ColdFusion, HTML is part of the language; in Ruby or Python it's usually relegated to a templating library; in Javascript the DOM is usually a library and it's bad practice to build up HTML strings (in 2015, at least; in 2008 it was good practice to build up HTML strings, because it was orders of magnitude faster than using the DOM). In Matlab or R, statistical and linear-algebra functions are part of the language, while in Python they're a library. In C++, strings, hashtables, and arrays are part of the standard library (or not even that, in early versions), while in Python & Ruby, they're part of the language. In Lisp the language parser is part of the language; in Rust, C++ (under Clang), Python, and Go it's part of the standard library; in many other languages it's not available at all. There are certain best practices that have emerged for general purpose languages. Imba is not a general purpose language; it's explicitly meant for web programming, and makes sense that it would build common web programming functionality into the language itself.
coldtea 11y ago
>Wait, what? React is a javascript library, not a programming language. Written in javascript.... How can Imba be faster? The same way an advanced primitive in a language can be faster than another language + framework code to do the same thing. What exactly is startling? It's not like languages/libraries and frameworks have some hard defined boundaries. What's a library for one language can be built-in primitives for another (e.g. consider using vectors and hashmaps in C vs Python, or consider something even more powerful like APL or Rebol). >Does Imba also include a dom-diffing algorithm.. If so, why would you built that into the language... Woudnt it be better to write a library in imba-lang that can do dom diffing? No, it's not always better to have "a library" vs first class support. Not to mention that some things are impossible to do with regular user code in a language vs first class code (e.g. consider how Go's make() is "blessed" to work as a generic function). Especially here, where the whole purpose of the language is to be a DSL for web programming and to incorporate all these conveniences. Nothing new either: we have had languages with first class support for specific use cases since at least the 60's.

by TeeWEE 11y ago

judofyr 11y ago

> Does Imba also include a dom-diffing algorithm Yes. > Woudnt it be better to write a library in imba-lang that can do dom diffing? It is: https://github.com/somebee/imba/blob/master/src/imba/dom.static.imba https://github.com/somebee/imba/blob/master/src/imba/dom.sta.... It's a required runtime library if you want to use the tag syntax. The difference between "language" and "core library" is always a bit mushy. For instance, the JavaScript doesn't only specify the semantics of operations, but also the main objects (String, Array, etc) and a set of functions (push, pop, indexOf, etc). In the sense that JavaScript ships with default objects for dealing with Arrays and Strings, Imba ships with default classes for dealing with tags and DOM elements. Yes, we could say that tags should just be sugar syntax over regular function calls (which it actually is) and move the DOM diffing out of "Imba". But really, the main point about Imba is the tag functionality and we believe we only need one good implementation.

pc2g4d 11y ago

I think they were comparing based on the performance of a simple application: "For a semi-complex application like TodoMVC, it is more than 20 times faster than React with less code, and a much smaller library." I think the comparison makes sense because Imba seems to imply a lightweight framework. At least, the generated code in the examples on the front page references a `t$` function, which has to come from somewhere.

nostrademons 11y ago

There's no rule that says the language/library/framework divide has to lie where contemporary scripting languages put it. In PHP and ColdFusion, HTML is part of the language; in Ruby or Python it's usually relegated to a templating library; in Javascript the DOM is usually a library and it's bad practice to build up HTML strings (in 2015, at least; in 2008 it was good practice to build up HTML strings, because it was orders of magnitude faster than using the DOM). In Matlab or R, statistical and linear-algebra functions are part of the language, while in Python they're a library. In C++, strings, hashtables, and arrays are part of the standard library (or not even that, in early versions), while in Python & Ruby, they're part of the language. In Lisp the language parser is part of the language; in Rust, C++ (under Clang), Python, and Go it's part of the standard library; in many other languages it's not available at all. There are certain best practices that have emerged for general purpose languages. Imba is not a general purpose language; it's explicitly meant for web programming, and makes sense that it would build common web programming functionality into the language itself.

coldtea 11y ago

>Wait, what? React is a javascript library, not a programming language. Written in javascript.... How can Imba be faster? The same way an advanced primitive in a language can be faster than another language + framework code to do the same thing. What exactly is startling? It's not like languages/libraries and frameworks have some hard defined boundaries. What's a library for one language can be built-in primitives for another (e.g. consider using vectors and hashmaps in C vs Python, or consider something even more powerful like APL or Rebol). >Does Imba also include a dom-diffing algorithm.. If so, why would you built that into the language... Woudnt it be better to write a library in imba-lang that can do dom diffing? No, it's not always better to have "a library" vs first class support. Not to mention that some things are impossible to do with regular user code in a language vs first class code (e.g. consider how Go's make() is "blessed" to work as a generic function). Especially here, where the whole purpose of the language is to be a DSL for web programming and to incorporate all these conveniences. Nothing new either: we have had languages with first class support for specific use cases since at least the 60's.