4 ms·
Pretty easy to succeed when it's the only language a browser supports.
by 38 3y ago
Pretty easy to succeed when it's the only language a browser supports.
- dragonwriter 3y ago“JavaScript’s success is unfair”, sure, whatever. But that’s not the same as “JavaScript is a failure”.
- baq 3y agoThe point is that success sure tastes bitter.
- dragonwriter 3y agoYes, as expected of a successful language, JavaScript clearly falls into the first category of Stroustroup’s observation: “There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses.”
- amichal 3y agoIt wasn't the only language browsers (vbscript was allowed client side in early ie) supported and also isn't anymore with wasm
- filleduchaos 3y ago> and also isn't anymore with wasm I don't buy this, considering that wasm still doesn't actually have access to the Web APIs that JavaScript has access to (and relies on JS to even be loaded in the first place). In my opinion, if that's what counts as being a supported language, then JS was never the only supported language to begin with since you could always compile other languages to run on the web through JavaScript (for example Emscripten with the asm.js target predates WebAssembly). The only thing that wasm currently offers over the previous status quo is that it's faster (for some workloads).
- paulddraper 3y agoJava and ActionScript -- though technically not supported out of the box -- had practically full support.