3 ms·
Since your opinions on some language features are controversial in a sense (like `==`) - it could be nice if you could elaborate a bit on why you made them in t
by inglor 12y ago
Since your opinions on some language features are controversial in a sense (like `==`) - it could be nice if you could elaborate a bit on why you made them in that time span?
- janesconference 12y agoMr. Eich explained it here: http://www.quora.com/Did-JavaScript-evolve-from-another-product-or-scripting-language http://www.quora.com/Did-JavaScript-evolve-from-another-prod... "Lloyd [Tabb] and Bill [Turpin] made suggestions such as too-loose implicit conversions for the == operator, and the String.prototype.link/bold/blink/etc. HTML formatting methods. My fault for taking these, they were mistakes."
- BrendanEich 12y agoAgain, my mistake. Not passing buck here. Borland had a language called Lucy (Loose-C) that was wild with implicit conversions, but counter-example -- my bad for making the changes to ur-JS.