3 ms·

I am not familiar with JS in GTK+, but if it's a JS binding for GTK+ it's exactly what I meant when I said that on the desktop you can implement a user interfac

by giamma 3y ago

I am not familiar with JS in GTK+, but if it's a JS binding for GTK+ it's exactly what I meant when I said that on the desktop you can implement a user interface using your preferred language as long as bindings exist for a decent widget toolkit. And it sounds totally legit to me. If instead what you are referring to is something similar to Electron, that is something I "hate"; I understand it's a cheap way for a Web Developer to reuse the skills and build a desktop application, but the result is typically buggy, bloated, slow, and does not integrate properly with the desktop environment (fonts, colors, clipboard, accessibility are just the first things that come mind).

cxr 3y ago
I'm responding to your thread—the one where in response to your suggestion that it would be a good thing if it were possible to prevent "this" (presumably the introduction of JS in 1995, the topic of the submission), the person replying to you wrote, "I know it's the fashion on HN to hate Javascript[...] It's not Javascript's fault the language was ruined by SV and survellance capitalism." The things you're complaining about are not a JavaScript problem. They're a programmers-who-have-their-feet-firmly-planted-in-the-world-of-NPM-and-modern-webdev-tooling problem. > something similar to Electron[...] is something I "hate" Wait till you find out how Firefox itself (i.e. the UI and other application logic) is implemented: "DOM, CSS and plain JavaScript". Mozilla was doing Electron-style apps before Electron ever existed. Somehow it's a higher quality app than the sorts of things you had in mind when you brought up Electron. Again: that's because it's not a JavaScript problem.
- giamma 3y ago
  Sure, I am not against JavaScript per se (although my preference goes to strongly typed languages), my first comment had a smiley at the end, I just firmly believe that the way we build UI for the Web today is flawed.
  - cxr 3y ago
    So don't build them that way. You could do worse than ignoring every piece of advice that is considered best practice in mainstream modern Web development.

by giamma 3y ago

cxr 3y ago

I'm responding to your thread—the one where in response to your suggestion that it would be a good thing if it were possible to prevent "this" (presumably the introduction of JS in 1995, the topic of the submission), the person replying to you wrote, "I know it's the fashion on HN to hate Javascript[...] It's not Javascript's fault the language was ruined by SV and survellance capitalism." The things you're complaining about are not a JavaScript problem. They're a programmers-who-have-their-feet-firmly-planted-in-the-world-of-NPM-and-modern-webdev-tooling problem. > something similar to Electron[...] is something I "hate" Wait till you find out how Firefox itself (i.e. the UI and other application logic) is implemented: "DOM, CSS and plain JavaScript". Mozilla was doing Electron-style apps before Electron ever existed. Somehow it's a higher quality app than the sorts of things you had in mind when you brought up Electron. Again: that's because it's not a JavaScript problem.

giamma 3y ago
Sure, I am not against JavaScript per se (although my preference goes to strongly typed languages), my first comment had a smiley at the end, I just firmly believe that the way we build UI for the Web today is flawed.
- cxr 3y ago
  So don't build them that way. You could do worse than ignoring every piece of advice that is considered best practice in mainstream modern Web development.