3 ms·

Move Over, AJAX, ARAX Is Here - Asynchronous Ruby and XML

• sant0sk1 18y ago
  FTA: "If this is about using Silverlight to host client-side browser scripting in Ruby, it's definitely an appealing notion, but the problem will always be about Silverlight being a Microsoft technology." I couldn't agree more.
  • nickb 18y ago
    Embrace. Extend. Extinguish.
• tptacek 18y ago
  Who cares who owns it? Microsoft is doing a fine job with the CLR/DLR. The problem isn't Microsoft; it's that thick client is thick client regardless of whether it's .NET, Java, or Flash. Users hate thick client apps.
  • LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
    Users hate thick client apps. [Citation Needed] Personally I just want to see a decent bytecode VM defined as a web standard so that I can write in any language that compiles down to it. And it needs to not be locked to any one vendor. Sorry Adobe and Microsoft.
    • tptacek 18y ago
      Why not just compile down to Javascript? Research compilers don't compile to assembly; they compile to C.
      • LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
        That's definitely an option. It just feels to me like going around your elbow to get to your knee.
        • tptacek 18y ago
          It seems extremely unlikely that Microsoft, Mozilla, Apple, and Opera are going to agree on a cross-browser VM while Javascript, Flash, Silverlight and Java are floating around. I think we're stuck with Javascript for the next 10 years.
          • LogicHoleFlaw 18y ago
            You're probably right. Let's convene again in a decade then?
• jamesbritt 18y ago
  I prefer to write Ruby than JavaScript, but I do enjoy JavaScript. It's not that big of deal to use both.