4 ms·
Given that the ECMAScript community has (for good reason; "don't break the web") decided to avoid backwards-incompatible changes, that necessarily places a limi
by austinz 12y ago
Given that the ECMAScript community has (for good reason; "don't break the web") decided to avoid backwards-incompatible changes, that necessarily places a limit on the amount of "fixing" they can do to the language. New or enhanced features are okay, rectifying mistakes is harder.
(This isn't just a JS thing; go talk to any random Python developer and ask them what they think of Python 2 vs 3. There are tradeoffs to both approaches.)
http://www.2ality.com/2014/12/one-javascript.html http://www.2ality.com/2014/12/one-javascript.html
- CmonDev 12y ago"don't break the web" I know it's not your fault but this statement doesn't make any sense. Web is made of hyper-linked content not jQuery animations and AJAX.
- emodendroket 12y agoNo one cares what the Web was originally intended to be, frankly.
- CmonDev 12y agoThen why care about language designed for animating monkeys?
- emodendroket 12y agoBecause there are now God knows how many millions of applications built on top of it that would break if you made backwards-incompatible changes. But I don't think you're really unaware of that.