4 ms·

He created JavaScript in 10 days. It's still in use 20 years later. That's very respectable.

smitherfield 11y ago
Because it had (and still has) a monopoly on code that runs inside the browser. And it's a pig that's had quite a bit of lipstick put on it. It wouldn't be in widespread use if people had the choice. That all said, WebAssembly is potentially an avenue to break that monopoly, and I do give him credit for seeking to address the issue.
- mcbutterbunz 11y ago
  People did have a choice: Java Applets, ActiveX, Flash, VBScript. Those all lost.
  - smitherfield 11y ago
    Three of those were plugins and the last was proprietary to Internet Explorer only, although I'll admit it was also worse than Javascript. "Javascript: It's better than VBScript!" And despite being an (awful) plugin with an IDE that cost $600, Flash won in the pre-iPhone/V8 era.
    - Touche 11y ago
      > Three of those were plugins and the last was proprietary to Internet Explorer only They all started from a similar position, JS wasn't a standard from day one, there's a reason why it's emcascript today. > And despite being an (awful) plugin with an IDE that cost $600, Flash won in the pre-iPhone/V8 era. That's laughable, what percentage of the web ran on Flash in 2007, 1%?
      - smitherfield 11y ago
        >They all started from a similar position, JS wasn't a standard from day one, there's a reason why it's emcascript today. No, Javascript had the huge advantage of being first; it's the only one on your list that both wasn't a plugin and was supported by IE and Netscape. And yes, modern Javascript is a better technology than any of those, although that's really damning with faint praise. If Netscape Navigator 2 had shipped with, say, a Perl VM in addition to the Javascript VM, then I can guarantee you that everybody would've written their scripts in Perl instead of Javascript. >That's laughable, what percentage of the web ran on Flash in 2007, 1%? Back in the day, the only ways you could write a web app of any complexity/performance were to either use Flash or do it serverside (remember – not long ago! – when the new hot web technology was Ruby on Rails? Remember when it was PHP?). Flash was the only option if you wanted video (well, it or something truly evil like RealPlayer) or if you wanted a consistent and appealing look for your site. Flash was on 56% of all websites as of 2010: http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2011/04/05/http-archive-url-list-flash-trends/ http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2011/04/05/http-archive-url... Google trends for Flash vs. Javascript in the SF Bay Area: https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=%2Fm%2F02p97%2C%20%2Fm%2F058b6&geo=US-CA-807&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT%2B5 https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=%2Fm%2F02p97%2C%20%2...
        Touche 11y ago
        Flash has long been used to support features not-yet available in the DOM APIs such as copy/paste and video, and of course in ads. There's a huge difference between that and building Flash apps; apps where a flash-displayed interface is the primary way of using the app. Outside of games those were never very popular, JS had overcome it with Google Maps.
na85 11y ago
>He created JavaScript in 10 days. It shows. JavaScript is fucking horrible, to put it mildly.
- over 11y ago
  Haha, God made the world in 7 days, it's even worse.
- mcbutterbunz 11y ago
  Its got bad parts and its got good parts. Once you learn how to ignore the bad parts (and the bad examples) the language really shines. Especially with the newer versions.
  - stray 11y ago
    Stockholm Syndrome.
Sanddancer 11y ago
I've written DSLs in a day that have seen usage beyond its original intent. Javascript's a dirty hack that's only had dirtier hacks stacked atop it.

Because it had (and still has) a monopoly on code that runs inside the browser. And it's a pig that's had quite a bit of lipstick put on it. It wouldn't be in widespread use if people had the choice. That all said, WebAssembly is potentially an avenue to break that monopoly, and I do give him credit for seeking to address the issue.

mcbutterbunz 11y ago
People did have a choice: Java Applets, ActiveX, Flash, VBScript. Those all lost.
- smitherfield 11y ago
  Three of those were plugins and the last was proprietary to Internet Explorer only, although I'll admit it was also worse than Javascript. "Javascript: It's better than VBScript!" And despite being an (awful) plugin with an IDE that cost $600, Flash won in the pre-iPhone/V8 era.
  - Touche 11y ago
    > Three of those were plugins and the last was proprietary to Internet Explorer only They all started from a similar position, JS wasn't a standard from day one, there's a reason why it's emcascript today. > And despite being an (awful) plugin with an IDE that cost $600, Flash won in the pre-iPhone/V8 era. That's laughable, what percentage of the web ran on Flash in 2007, 1%?
    - smitherfield 11y ago
      >They all started from a similar position, JS wasn't a standard from day one, there's a reason why it's emcascript today. No, Javascript had the huge advantage of being first; it's the only one on your list that both wasn't a plugin and was supported by IE and Netscape. And yes, modern Javascript is a better technology than any of those, although that's really damning with faint praise. If Netscape Navigator 2 had shipped with, say, a Perl VM in addition to the Javascript VM, then I can guarantee you that everybody would've written their scripts in Perl instead of Javascript. >That's laughable, what percentage of the web ran on Flash in 2007, 1%? Back in the day, the only ways you could write a web app of any complexity/performance were to either use Flash or do it serverside (remember – not long ago! – when the new hot web technology was Ruby on Rails? Remember when it was PHP?). Flash was the only option if you wanted video (well, it or something truly evil like RealPlayer) or if you wanted a consistent and appealing look for your site. Flash was on 56% of all websites as of 2010: http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2011/04/05/http-archive-url-list-flash-trends/ http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2011/04/05/http-archive-url... Google trends for Flash vs. Javascript in the SF Bay Area: https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=%2Fm%2F02p97%2C%20%2Fm%2F058b6&geo=US-CA-807&cmpt=q&tz=Etc%2FGMT%2B5 https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=%2Fm%2F02p97%2C%20%2...
      - Touche 11y ago
        Flash has long been used to support features not-yet available in the DOM APIs such as copy/paste and video, and of course in ads. There's a huge difference between that and building Flash apps; apps where a flash-displayed interface is the primary way of using the app. Outside of games those were never very popular, JS had overcome it with Google Maps.

na85 11y ago

>He created JavaScript in 10 days. It shows. JavaScript is fucking horrible, to put it mildly.

over 11y ago
Haha, God made the world in 7 days, it's even worse.
mcbutterbunz 11y ago
Its got bad parts and its got good parts. Once you learn how to ignore the bad parts (and the bad examples) the language really shines. Especially with the newer versions.
- stray 11y ago
  Stockholm Syndrome.

Sanddancer 11y ago

I've written DSLs in a day that have seen usage beyond its original intent. Javascript's a dirty hack that's only had dirtier hacks stacked atop it.