3 ms·
I'm sorry but Dart just doesn't have that many convincing features. Having type checking is a good thing and I like it, but there also needs to be things that a
by rtpg 12y ago
I'm sorry but Dart just doesn't have that many convincing features. Having type checking is a good thing and I like it, but there also needs to be things that allow me to write more concise and clear code (and allowing certain patterns to be easily expressed)
The patterns that Dart facilitate are just as easy to describe in JS.
- dubcanada 12y agoWhat are convincing features? I'm not sure you've look at Dart, but there is a lot more then type checking.
- tomp 12y agoThere's almost nothing in Dart that isn't in Java.
- Sargos 12y agoJava... or JavaScript? I know this is pedantic but if you are talking about the intricacies of Dart vs JavaScript then making that mistake brings up a lot of questions.
- tkubacki 12y agoexcept Dart compiles to effective JS (see Dart perf) + mixins + await async (soon) + less verbose + good unified package system + ... yea sure - almost nothing.
- rdtsc 12y ago> but there also needs to be things that allow me to write more concise and clear code So what are some examples of those things that would helper you write more concise code?
- _greim_ 12y agoDart's operator overloading alone makes it easier to write clear and concise code than in JS, e.g. for map and list types. // dart var listA = listB + listC; // js var listA = listB.concat(listC); That's just the tip of the iceburg. Overriding the [] accessor for custom list types opens up whole worlds of possibilities.