3 ms·

To be completely honest, they are the maintainers of one of the largest Javascript implementations. It really only makes sense for them to have significant inp

To be completely honest, they are the maintainers of one of the largest Javascript implementations. It really only makes sense for them to have significant input on the features that make it into the language. Mozilla, Microsoft, and Apple could have done the same thing, as they all write the software, and that only seems fair. If there is a significant reason why something won't work in one or more of the major engines, it might need to be rethought. I'm not sure why everyone is jumping on this like it's some kind of nefarious thing. What would google have to gain from killing this proposal?

wodencafe 10y ago
When the people designing the language are the same people providing the implementation, it leads to vendor lock in. Remember Microsoft in the 1990's, remember the massive Antitrust case about IE?
- uiri 10y ago
  The antitrust case about IE was related to Microsoft using their position in the operating system market to give them an unfair advantage in the browser market. It had nothing to do with the embrace-extend-extinguish which they attempted on JavaScript.
  - snerbles 10y ago
    They couldn't feasibly attempt EEE on JS without Internet Explorer's dominant market share.
  - euyyn 10y ago
    Plus the advantage they wanted in the browser market (to strangle Netscape dead, in their own words) was purposefully to artificially maintain their monopoly in the OS market.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]