2 ms·

I haven't had much experience with Dart, but from observation and brief casual use it strikes me as if Google looked at JavaScript and decided that the way to f

• afsina 13y ago
  Far from it. http://programming.oreilly.com/2013/05/dart-is-not-the-language-you-think-it-is.html http://programming.oreilly.com/2013/05/dart-is-not-the-langu...
  • vezzy-fnord 13y ago
    A few of these differences are subtle or largely not drastic. Terse main function -> why a main function in the first place? The VM excluding the compilation into bytecode is a runtime difference, not a purely language one. Pure OO is a natural consequence of having an optional typing system, thus removing the necessity for primitive data types. Multiple classes, no mandatory class requirement, multiple inheritance and operator overloading are all fine. These are improvements to the Java model, allowing for more power. String interpolation is fine, it removes the need for the bloated String.format() method or inelegant string concatenations in Java. I never said that Dart was a complete Java clone, however. I implied that its design was largely motivated by a philosophy to apply a Java-esque model for the web. Of course they've made some improvements, but I don't find it that great in general. I think the web would benefit from a client-side scripting language based on Dylan. The semantics of Lisp with the syntax of ALGOL. Since the web is becoming largely data-driven, having code as data would be a big advantage, while still retaining a familiar syntax.
• duaneb 13y ago
  I think it's actually the opposite; consider the ability to interpolate domain variables into string literals.