3 ms·
The politics with Swift are well understood - it's simply an alternative to Objective-C that is technically superior in. A bunch of ways. Objective-C is effect
by gress 12y ago
The politics with Swift are well understood - it's simply an alternative to Objective-C that is technically superior in. A bunch of ways. Objective-C is effectively proprietary, so if you are willing to program Objective-C, you are presumably ok with programming on Apple's platform and it's just a straightforward technical choice.
Dart is an alternative to JavaScript, and the politics are a lot more murky. JavaScript is the open language of the web and is not controlled by a single vendor. Although Google has opaquely submitted Dart to ECMA, the politics are much less clear, and of course they have given themselves a multi-year head start in implementing and understanding the language. Supporting Dart involves risking handing even more control over the web to Google.
- pjmlp 12y agoGoogle submitting Dart to ECMA is no different from Microsoft submitting .NET to ECMA, alongside the .NET early versions source code (I forgot how it was called).
- gress 12y agoAgreed. It really just tags a particular version of the language. It gives zero commitment from Google about how the language will be evolved or deployed. Unless they do a lot more to make the language into a commons, it's really just a PR move so they can say 'but standards'.