4 ms·

But why did they say that?

• cwp 12y ago
  It a threat to their control of the web. Javascript is currently the only real option for client-side software, and Mozilla owns Javascript. Why would they do anything to help Google take that away from them?
  • zo1 12y ago
    I'm not quite understanding what you're saying. Care to elaborate a little more? Google already has a better JS implementation that Firefox,so how would less javascript usage be a good thing for Google?
• deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
• bryanlarsen 12y ago
  Adding support for Dart would be a huge maintenance expense over the years, for a language that's basically a minor improvement over Javascript. If they're going to support a new language, how about something with widespread usage, such as Python? How about something that offers significantly different capabilities, such as R? How about something that supports a huge number of languages and/or significant speed improvements, such as the LLVM IR? If they're going to open such a huge can of worms, they're going to want to see substantial benefits rather than small incremental improvements. They obviously can't support everything, so to pick a language it has to be demonstrated that the language is a better choice than (pretty much) any other choice. Dart has not done that.
  • lmm 12y ago
    I think that's a disingenuous argument. Mozilla has been happy to support extremely marginal standards in the past - speech, the whole microformats mess, webfonts. Dart had (and has) more momentum behind it, more developers wanting to use it, than those. By all means, bring on Python, R, or LLVM IR. I'd support any and all of those (though including one doesn't have to mean excluding Dart). Any of those would be a huge improvement over Javascript. But Mozilla seems to see ensuring as much code as possible gets written in that abominable language as part of its mission.