4 ms·
Agreed, maybe that's why fewer tools (if any) exist to do things like programmatic refactoring in JavaScript (does WebStorm do that at all?) That being said, I
by willurd 13y ago
Agreed, maybe that's why fewer tools (if any) exist to do things like programmatic refactoring in JavaScript (does WebStorm do that at all?)
That being said, I've found the language a pleasure to work with (aside from browser incompatibility issues) and with the proper application of design principles such as modularity (check out require.js and the r.js optimizer) and, yes, DRY, I can be just as productive, if not more so, in JavaScript as I am in any statically-typed language.
- Peaker 13y agoWhich statically-typed languages have you tried?
- willurd 13y agoI've got varying degrees of experience (some professional, some not) with C++, C, Objective-C, Java, ActionScript 3. EDIT: Also C# (so many languages, I can't even remember which ones I've used sometimes). I'm also not including TypeScript or Dart (optional static typing), which I've technically "tried", but don't know much about.
- Peaker 13y agoThe ml style statically typed languages are very different from all of these (in good ways). For example, in Haskell you can write code as if you're in a dynamic language without annotating all the types and yet you get all of the benefits of types. It's the best of both worlds. Concluding that static languages suck after using java and c++ et al is a common mistake, and is understandable.
- willurd 13y agoWell, I never said static languages suck :) I really like static typing actually, and have seriously thought about using TypeScript or Dart. I've also got years of professional experience with C++ and AS3 and I love them both. I think Java is a fantastic language. And Objective-C...is growing on me ;) What I did say was that I can be just as productive in those languages as I am in JavaScript, if not more so. It remains to be seen whether I can gain more productivity with TypeScript or Dart.