4 ms·

What do you mean by "burned by Dart 1.0"? Dart was rejected by the community it was aimed at, Javascripts devs (and for pretty dumb reasons, I don't have much

What do you mean by "burned by Dart 1.0"? Dart was rejected by the community it was aimed at, Javascripts devs (and for pretty dumb reasons, I don't have much respect for either Javascript or its devs). Google understandably took the opportunity to reboot it. None of this is the same as dropping it, which for sure would merit "being burned". It's now a modernised and slick version of Javascript (minus the functional, which no one uses anyway) with a full Android and IOS framework and extensive and properly documented libraries. And it's opensource. At this point it's not possible for it to be 'dropped'.

bsaul 8y ago
I haven’t seen this argument about about open source projects in a long time, so i’d like to respond : Beeing open source only means an organisation, or a group of developers, with the capacity to handle a project the size of flutter + dart, could do so if they wanted to. Which means basically noone, except maybe in China, because nobody could have the firepower to deal with something this big ( maintain and even harder have it evolve) for free.
- lorriman 8y ago
  That argument applies to something like Linux. Here we are talking about a language and wrappers and an essentially completed framework (granted new ideas mean no framework is every completed). And unlike a google service, which requires continued resource usage and high cost, flutter+dart has low needs. It may get outdated, but it can't be disappeared like other dropped google projects. In any case, Unless Dart+flutter becomes an undesirable competitor to another google offering, there is no reason for Google to drop it unless it fails to get sufficient adoption. But I think that's unlikely. Javascript devs are widening their horizons these days (as opposed to their rejection of Dart 1.0), and Dart only needs a few of those javascript devs to take an interest. The framework is an easy crossover for many of them, with an almost instant access to app development and little commitment needed to spin up.
  - bsaul 8y ago
    Dart still has a long way to go as a language to catch up on the recent trends of statically typed PL (rust and swift come to mind), flutter needs constant update for every release of both iOS and Android to make sure their native theme are up to date and that they offer a decent equivalent to any new GUI component those platform release. Just look at how long it took to get a correct map on flutter (and i don't think they've catched up yet). I think they took a very good direction from a technical point of view, to recode everything from the lowest level possible, but that kind of approach requires a tremendous level of commitment.
    - lorriman 8y ago
      Languages don't need to keep up with trends to stay used. But updating languages is the fun stuff; there won't be a problem with volunteers for that especially at universities. All the hard work has been done, unless an update would require a complete rewrite of the compilers which, sure, isn't likely. Flutter needs an update once a year at most, and is mostly cosmetic and a bit of wrapping. Again, the heavy lifting has been done. Coding from the bottom up....has been done. I think you may be overstating the 'commitment'. What we need to keep in mind here, is the context, that dart/flutter is easy access - it's no Angular or Cocoa - and that no sane, mature dev programs in only one language and one platform unless it's legacy. We're not talking about a massive commitment from a dev, so talk of 'being burned' by Dart 1.0 is already a bit of a headscratcher when google didn't drop it, rather changed up and arguably improved Dart. How can that be called 'being burned'. For instance, dropping the need for 'new'. So, sure, it makes the code slightly less readable, but it also opens Dart to neat code and even maybe DSLs. Then they added Flutter.
      - pjmlp 8y ago
        Dart was rescued from being completely dropped by AdWords team, while key designers like Gilad abandoned the project not happy with how things were going.

bsaul 8y ago

I haven’t seen this argument about about open source projects in a long time, so i’d like to respond : Beeing open source only means an organisation, or a group of developers, with the capacity to handle a project the size of flutter + dart, could do so if they wanted to. Which means basically noone, except maybe in China, because nobody could have the firepower to deal with something this big ( maintain and even harder have it evolve) for free.

lorriman 8y ago
That argument applies to something like Linux. Here we are talking about a language and wrappers and an essentially completed framework (granted new ideas mean no framework is every completed). And unlike a google service, which requires continued resource usage and high cost, flutter+dart has low needs. It may get outdated, but it can't be disappeared like other dropped google projects. In any case, Unless Dart+flutter becomes an undesirable competitor to another google offering, there is no reason for Google to drop it unless it fails to get sufficient adoption. But I think that's unlikely. Javascript devs are widening their horizons these days (as opposed to their rejection of Dart 1.0), and Dart only needs a few of those javascript devs to take an interest. The framework is an easy crossover for many of them, with an almost instant access to app development and little commitment needed to spin up.
- bsaul 8y ago
  Dart still has a long way to go as a language to catch up on the recent trends of statically typed PL (rust and swift come to mind), flutter needs constant update for every release of both iOS and Android to make sure their native theme are up to date and that they offer a decent equivalent to any new GUI component those platform release. Just look at how long it took to get a correct map on flutter (and i don't think they've catched up yet). I think they took a very good direction from a technical point of view, to recode everything from the lowest level possible, but that kind of approach requires a tremendous level of commitment.
  - lorriman 8y ago
    Languages don't need to keep up with trends to stay used. But updating languages is the fun stuff; there won't be a problem with volunteers for that especially at universities. All the hard work has been done, unless an update would require a complete rewrite of the compilers which, sure, isn't likely. Flutter needs an update once a year at most, and is mostly cosmetic and a bit of wrapping. Again, the heavy lifting has been done. Coding from the bottom up....has been done. I think you may be overstating the 'commitment'. What we need to keep in mind here, is the context, that dart/flutter is easy access - it's no Angular or Cocoa - and that no sane, mature dev programs in only one language and one platform unless it's legacy. We're not talking about a massive commitment from a dev, so talk of 'being burned' by Dart 1.0 is already a bit of a headscratcher when google didn't drop it, rather changed up and arguably improved Dart. How can that be called 'being burned'. For instance, dropping the need for 'new'. So, sure, it makes the code slightly less readable, but it also opens Dart to neat code and even maybe DSLs. Then they added Flutter.
    - pjmlp 8y ago
      Dart was rescued from being completely dropped by AdWords team, while key designers like Gilad abandoned the project not happy with how things were going.