3 ms·
People would benefit more from a stricter subset of JS that has decent performance characteristics and actually sound typing.
by hajile 4y ago
People would benefit more from a stricter subset of JS that has decent performance characteristics and actually sound typing.
- AA-BA-94-2A-56 4y agoI agree, but I can't help but think of that meme about there being N+1 standards. The introduction of a stricter subset of JS will make Javascript more complicated, not less. I hate that, because honestly Javascript and the web would benefit form removing a lot of the cruft.
- sli 4y ago> I hate that, because honestly Javascript and the web would benefit form removing a lot of the cruft. This is the primary argument against worrying about N+1 standards. We know it's bad, if we simply do nothing at all, we know it will get worse. We can and should at least try.
- esprehn 4y agoAs someone who's been part of the team who tried to do exactly this, I don't think it can work. Once you start subsetting things it quickly turns towards being "better" than the existing web, and soon all backwards compatibility is gone. All those legacy features and existing pages are the back pressure that keeps the evolution of the web stable.
- solarkraft 4y ago"use stricter"
- scotty79 4y agoAt this point any other language soundly typed or not is semantically a subset of JS (at most plus some of their weird thing, like Rust ownership and move semantics). You are free to pick one and let JS be JS in all its glory.