5 ms·

browsers are very conservative about breaking changes. javascript features that allow for loose and questionable usage is the thing that got us into this mess i

browsers are very conservative about breaking changes. javascript features that allow for loose and questionable usage is the thing that got us into this mess in the first place. once this is out there, there will be code using it in the most incorrect way it can get away with, and no one will want to break that code later on. that's why it's not just important that we get "something", but we get it right.

rektide 4y ago
> javascript features that allow for loose and questionable usage is the thing that got us into this mess in the first place. And what "mess" is this? Again I think my previous advice is pretty on point: "Be happy!" Everything has only gotten better, from my perspective. That TypeScript exists & has grown up is yet more proof that incremental, ongoing, progressive advancement is amazing. I think if we'd tried to make everything all at once, it would have been a disaster. > once this is out there, there will be code using it in the most incorrect way it can get away with, and no one will want to break that code later on. This is a spec to let various typechecks be applied, but doesn't specify any specific type-system. I have a hard time visualizing whatever scary situation it is you are imagining. This seems low risk.
- yakshaving_jgt 4y ago
  > Everything has only gotten better, from my perspective. Would you accept the idea that the language has actually gotten worse? What would it take to convince you?
  - rektide 4y ago
    > What would it take to convince you? arguments. i've been doing this for over two decades, & the ability to sling async functions, w3c streams, abortcontrollers, modules, optional chaining,... everything is so kick ass better. my resistance to being convinced is going to be high, but heavens yes i'd love to entertain something higher & more illuminating than the general retrogressive cassally slanderous backhanding this language endlessly endures.
    - yakshaving_jgt 4y ago
      > arguments My argument is essentially that as the language has become more complex, it has become harder for more junior colleagues (and actually most programmers) to use the language effectively. Do you buy the idea that a language might be better if it were designed to guide the user towards success? Or do you think it’s better to just throw everything possible into the language, warts and all? > w3c streams I know what a stream is, and I know the W3C is. What is a “w3c stream”? > modules My experience has been that the implementation of this idea in JavaScript has been extremely fragmented.
      - rektide 4y ago

rektide 4y ago

> javascript features that allow for loose and questionable usage is the thing that got us into this mess in the first place. And what "mess" is this? Again I think my previous advice is pretty on point: "Be happy!" Everything has only gotten better, from my perspective. That TypeScript exists & has grown up is yet more proof that incremental, ongoing, progressive advancement is amazing. I think if we'd tried to make everything all at once, it would have been a disaster. > once this is out there, there will be code using it in the most incorrect way it can get away with, and no one will want to break that code later on. This is a spec to let various typechecks be applied, but doesn't specify any specific type-system. I have a hard time visualizing whatever scary situation it is you are imagining. This seems low risk.

yakshaving_jgt 4y ago
> Everything has only gotten better, from my perspective. Would you accept the idea that the language has actually gotten worse? What would it take to convince you?
- rektide 4y ago
  > What would it take to convince you? arguments. i've been doing this for over two decades, & the ability to sling async functions, w3c streams, abortcontrollers, modules, optional chaining,... everything is so kick ass better. my resistance to being convinced is going to be high, but heavens yes i'd love to entertain something higher & more illuminating than the general retrogressive cassally slanderous backhanding this language endlessly endures.
  - yakshaving_jgt 4y ago
    > arguments My argument is essentially that as the language has become more complex, it has become harder for more junior colleagues (and actually most programmers) to use the language effectively. Do you buy the idea that a language might be better if it were designed to guide the user towards success? Or do you think it’s better to just throw everything possible into the language, warts and all? > w3c streams I know what a stream is, and I know the W3C is. What is a “w3c stream”? > modules My experience has been that the implementation of this idea in JavaScript has been extremely fragmented.
    - rektide 4y ago