4 ms·
Web Development is fine, it's the Javascript, and especially the frontend world that's the problem. Why do we bother with a language that's inconcise, lacks so
by timonv 14y ago
Web Development is fine, it's the Javascript, and especially the frontend world that's the problem.
Why do we bother with a language that's inconcise, lacks so many common, useful functions (enumerals, strings, etc), and general doesn't do what we want it to do? In spite of fundamental problems, people try to address them with custom solutions. Those are inherently very PERSONAL solutions - because everyone wants to do it well and better - bound to raise discussion and competition at some point. That's what's happening. People are trying to fix something broken with their own, idealistic ideas.
There's nothing wrong with that, don't get me wrong, but I think we all know that we can do better on a more fundamental level.
- otibom 14y agoIs it very hard to fork Firefox or Chromium and replace the JS engine by luaJIT, pypy or even llvm ?
- marknutter 14y agoI'm shocked nobody has pointed this out, but we "bother" with javascript because it runs in browsers, and browsers are ubiquitous. Why does everyone who has personal issues with Javascript or web development in general seem to forget that it has become popular because of the webs ubiquity and the promise of cross-platform development?
- timonv 14y agoAnd that's exactly the problem. The promise has been there for _years_, it just never has been made up to. Sure, cross-platform development is cool, you can do that in Java. I can also do it in Ruby, Go, Rust, Clojure, Erlang or Haskell. And those solutions don't feel like a duct tape on a drainpipe. It's still the same as it was 10 years ago, we can't wrap our head around a solution that works for all browsers, hence, we can't just make the language concise, let alone change it fundamentally to solve the more actual problems of front end development. And then, if frameworks don't have to fix a language in their own way, we can get something real going. In any case, I just can't wrap my head around the discrepancy as to why-the-fuck-still.
- marknutter 14y agoI'm not sure I'm understanding. I develop web applications that run well on all major platforms and it's not nearly as hard to do as people make it out to be. And the difference between Javascript and Java, Ruby, Go, Rust, etc. is that it runs in an environment that literally everybody already has installed when they buy a computer - the web browser. No mucking around with installing the JVM, or downloading an application to install and keep up to date, etc... you just point your browser to say, Facebook.com or news.ycombinator.com and boom, you are served a nice, cross-platform application that never needs updating. Thus, the popularity of javascript and web technologies.
- timonv 14y agoUbiquitous does not imply concise across. Which is not the case.
- purplelobster 14y agoDay to day I work in C++. I've also used many much more elegant languages, Python, Haskell, etc. Right now I'm doing web development in my spare time, and I don't see where this hate for JavaScript is coming from. Sure, it might not be the prettiest language in the world, but who cares? It's what's available to us, and I'm actually quite satisfied it's JavaScript and not something worse. I don't seem to care half as much about languages as the average hacker news reader, I'm not sure why. I care about what I'm trying to create.
- camus 14y agoi guess you never had to build large applications with javascript. Imagine you need to write a js app by the size of your C++ programs ? that's what webdev are asked to do today, but without a built-in module system , without strict typing , without built-in class system ( you need to roll your own , which may not be compatible with the one used in the library you might use ) , without the insurance that the API you use works across all browsers , ... JS doesnt help you to build applications it comes with no battery included.