3 ms·
You've sidestepped my question though :) Why do you think NASA made the decision to use it? Is it not possible there were legitimate reasons? The implications
by westoncb 4y ago
You've sidestepped my question though :) Why do you think NASA made the decision to use it? Is it not possible there were legitimate reasons?
The implications you're suggesting about power, memory, and speed, or even predictability in semantics, depend on the particular language spec they implemented (it was not standard ecmascript), how they implemented, and how that implementation was used within the larger system.
It seems to me like just knowing it was javascript (for some definition of javascript) is not enough.
- Jensson 4y ago> Why do you think NASA made the decision to use it? Probably because they couldn't find low level programmers, it isn't easy to find people with good professional experience in C today, especially if you pay NASA wages.
- selfhoster11 4y agoSome people would kill for the ability to put a 1/2-year NASA stint on the resume, if for no other reason than the idea that they contributed to the scientific research and exploration of space.
- westoncb 4y agoThis is certainly not the case. For more details do a little exploring in the link I provided above. For one, the bulk of their code is low-level, just not this particular system where it wouldn't have made sense; for two, they did this in 2002 when it was almost certainly easier to find C programmers than javascript programmers; for three, the people writing this javascript were domain experts, not professional programmers.
- WalterBright 4y agoJavascript in those days was far slower and needed much more memory and power than native languages. Nothing in your link suggested otherwise.