4 ms·

How can you compare a language that introduces a bunch of syntactic sugar over JavaScript semantics (CoffeeScript) with a language that brings a cleaned and str

• magicalist 13y ago
  Only in the sense that I could have also compared it to any of the other languages that compile to Javascript. It was not meant as a commentary on the value of the language design. In fact, it was the opposite: Dart's mere existence doesn't mean I have to care about if people should be writing pure Javascript or worry about any potential Javascript existential crises Dart might raise. And that's great. It was a process to stop worrying and love the bomb -- so many HN articles proselytizing and condemning Coffeescript (and others) -- but I believe the healing started with the sheer popularity of Coffeescript, and then normalized when Brendan Eich stood on stage with Jeremy Ashkenas and told everyone that compiling to Javascript was A-OK in his book. So thinking of these languages in those terms is the reason I don't really care about the horse race and I'm ok with people writing in Dart if they want to. My domain will be fine, and might be improved as they find interesting things (syntax, developer tools, whatever) exploring a slightly different path toward a web scripting language. (though I'll continue to be annoyed if some article on web technology puts all its examples in X where X is not Javascript :)