7 ms·

> This is only about the Dart VM, not about the Dart language. The writing is on the wall already. If Dart hasn't the chance to become a natively supported lan

> This is only about the Dart VM, not about the Dart language. The writing is on the wall already. If Dart hasn't the chance to become a natively supported language, why would anyone pick it as a compile-to-JavaScript language, given there are so many superior options?

hydrogen18 12y ago
What do you find superior to Dart?
- frowaway001 12y ago
  Scala.js, Elm, PureScript, ...
  - skybrian 12y ago
    I'm a big fan of Elm but it's still experimental. Major non-backward-compatible changes to the languages still happen sometimes in new releases. Not the same thing, really. (Don't know that much about the others.)
    - frowaway001 12y ago
      Then pick Scala.js. Solid, mature, great libraries and one of the best languages out there, even when competing against real (in the sense of not compile-to-JavaScript-only) languages.
      - skybrian 12y ago
        I'm unlikely to give it a serious try because I find the complexity of the Scala language to be pretty scary. Still, I'm curious: how fast is the compiler? Does it generate compact code? Clear error messages?
        DennisP 12y ago
        I started using Scala a few weeks ago. I'm finding it's pretty easy to ease yourself into it. So far I'm not doing much that I couldn't do in C#, but it's more concise in Scala. I was productive with it the first day. I haven't tried scala.js yet, but I've gone through some presentation slides...they're claiming compact code that runs as fast as javascript, clear error messages that point to the line of scala sourcecode, and even some advantages over jvm scala (though I forget the details). Don't know about compile speed.
        frowaway001 12y ago
        Compilation to JS is a few additional seconds during development, and the rest of your comment is right to the point.
      - EugeneOZ 12y ago
        People are different and not all thinks Scala is great language...
  - tobltobs 12y ago
    Whoo, seems I am getting old. Thats the first time I hear anything of those languages.
  - jbergens 12y ago
    Aren't those, with the exception of Elm, much younger and less mature than Dart? I think a language has to reach a certain level before the majority of people will use it in production. And the tooling should be stable also. I think PureScript looks great but it has a different syntax (Haskell like) which may make it a hard sell and I'm not sure they have any debugger at all. When you use a compile-to-js language I think the debugger and editors are important, at least if your language is not very close to js (which Dart is).
ahoge 12y ago
Dart is natively supported outside browsers. There is the standalone VM, which you can use just like Node.js, and the VM library, which you can embed in native applications. The VM is crossplatform and it even supports ARM and MIPS. They are also working on an interpreter which will get around the JIT restrictions on iOS and Windows Phone.
- frowaway001 12y ago
  So why would I use this given there are languages which - are much better than Dart, - run in the browser and - run on a crossplatform VM which is much better than DartVM?
  - munificent 12y ago
    I think the obvious answer is that some people disagree with your first point. I think people should be programming in whatever language makes them happiest. For you that may not be Dart. For others, it is.
    - ahoge 12y ago
      For me, it is. Well, its semi-useless enums suck, but other than that I'm quite happy with it.
spankalee 12y ago
I find Dart to be far and away the best compile-to-JS language. That's more than enough for me.
- frowaway001 12y ago
  Sounds more like you never actually checked the available options.
  - untog 12y ago
    Sounds more like he has an individual opinion about the things that work best for him.
dragonwriter 12y ago
> If Dart hasn't the chance to become a natively supported language, why would anyone pick it as a compile-to-JavaScript language, given there are so many superior options? I don't think that the premise ("given there are so many superior options") is a non-controversial assertion. Which is probably why people who reject it would (and have been) picking it as a compile-to-JS language for web-facing projects. The focus on compile-to-JS and JS interop for the web announced in the blog post makes Dart a more, rather than less, attractive language for web development, because it eases fears that taking full advantage of Dart might, in the near future, mean "works better on Chrome" rather than "targets the whole web", and because it means that Dart will work better with the universe of browser-targeted tools that aren't all written in Dart.
rdtsc 12y ago
> given there are so many superior options? If there are so many, can you list at least 5 superior options for us please.
alwillis 12y ago
Nobody on this thread agrees with you that there are "so many superior options". As far as I can tell, the Dart team set out to create a clean slate approach to what web developers need in a language (front-end and on the server) to address today's complexities. What the Dart team couldn't foresee how many developers would come down with Stockholm syndrome regarding JavaScript. What people don’t get: adding more crap to JavaScript doesn’t make things easier, it makes things more complex. Think about it: the entire web is depending on a language that was thrown together in like 10 days and renamed from LiveScript to it would contain the word 'Java' because Java was the new hotness back in the day even though it had nothing to do with Jsva. And now we’re going to add all of the stuff we didn't think about back then when JavaScript was considered a weird, fringe toy language, when the most complex thing anyone did was image rollovers. JavaScript didn't "win" because it was great; it won because it good enough and we were literally stuck with it. Not everyone wants good enough; some people want an excellent, purpose built language for the web with all of the goodies we’ve come to expect on Day 1--no polyfills, no hacks, no waiting for a years long standards process to run its course. I’m looking forward to the Dart conference next month to see what’s next: https://www.dartlang.org/events/2015/summit/ https://www.dartlang.org/events/2015/summit/.
- frowaway001 12y ago
  > Not everyone wants good enough; some people want an excellent, purpose built language for the web with all of the goodies we’ve come to expect on Day 1--no polyfills, no hacks, no waiting for a years long standards process to run its course. Yes, absolutely; and Dart just doesn't fit that bill.

hydrogen18 12y ago

What do you find superior to Dart?

frowaway001 12y ago
Scala.js, Elm, PureScript, ...
- skybrian 12y ago
  I'm a big fan of Elm but it's still experimental. Major non-backward-compatible changes to the languages still happen sometimes in new releases. Not the same thing, really. (Don't know that much about the others.)
  - frowaway001 12y ago
    Then pick Scala.js. Solid, mature, great libraries and one of the best languages out there, even when competing against real (in the sense of not compile-to-JavaScript-only) languages.
    - skybrian 12y ago
      I'm unlikely to give it a serious try because I find the complexity of the Scala language to be pretty scary. Still, I'm curious: how fast is the compiler? Does it generate compact code? Clear error messages?
      - DennisP 12y ago
        I started using Scala a few weeks ago. I'm finding it's pretty easy to ease yourself into it. So far I'm not doing much that I couldn't do in C#, but it's more concise in Scala. I was productive with it the first day. I haven't tried scala.js yet, but I've gone through some presentation slides...they're claiming compact code that runs as fast as javascript, clear error messages that point to the line of scala sourcecode, and even some advantages over jvm scala (though I forget the details). Don't know about compile speed.
        frowaway001 12y ago
        Compilation to JS is a few additional seconds during development, and the rest of your comment is right to the point.
    - EugeneOZ 12y ago
      People are different and not all thinks Scala is great language...
- tobltobs 12y ago
  Whoo, seems I am getting old. Thats the first time I hear anything of those languages.
- jbergens 12y ago
  Aren't those, with the exception of Elm, much younger and less mature than Dart? I think a language has to reach a certain level before the majority of people will use it in production. And the tooling should be stable also. I think PureScript looks great but it has a different syntax (Haskell like) which may make it a hard sell and I'm not sure they have any debugger at all. When you use a compile-to-js language I think the debugger and editors are important, at least if your language is not very close to js (which Dart is).

ahoge 12y ago

Dart is natively supported outside browsers. There is the standalone VM, which you can use just like Node.js, and the VM library, which you can embed in native applications. The VM is crossplatform and it even supports ARM and MIPS. They are also working on an interpreter which will get around the JIT restrictions on iOS and Windows Phone.

frowaway001 12y ago
So why would I use this given there are languages which - are much better than Dart, - run in the browser and - run on a crossplatform VM which is much better than DartVM?
- munificent 12y ago
  I think the obvious answer is that some people disagree with your first point. I think people should be programming in whatever language makes them happiest. For you that may not be Dart. For others, it is.
  - ahoge 12y ago
    For me, it is. Well, its semi-useless enums suck, but other than that I'm quite happy with it.

spankalee 12y ago

I find Dart to be far and away the best compile-to-JS language. That's more than enough for me.

frowaway001 12y ago
Sounds more like you never actually checked the available options.
- untog 12y ago
  Sounds more like he has an individual opinion about the things that work best for him.

dragonwriter 12y ago

> If Dart hasn't the chance to become a natively supported language, why would anyone pick it as a compile-to-JavaScript language, given there are so many superior options? I don't think that the premise ("given there are so many superior options") is a non-controversial assertion. Which is probably why people who reject it would (and have been) picking it as a compile-to-JS language for web-facing projects. The focus on compile-to-JS and JS interop for the web announced in the blog post makes Dart a more, rather than less, attractive language for web development, because it eases fears that taking full advantage of Dart might, in the near future, mean "works better on Chrome" rather than "targets the whole web", and because it means that Dart will work better with the universe of browser-targeted tools that aren't all written in Dart.

rdtsc 12y ago

> given there are so many superior options? If there are so many, can you list at least 5 superior options for us please.

alwillis 12y ago

Nobody on this thread agrees with you that there are "so many superior options". As far as I can tell, the Dart team set out to create a clean slate approach to what web developers need in a language (front-end and on the server) to address today's complexities. What the Dart team couldn't foresee how many developers would come down with Stockholm syndrome regarding JavaScript. What people don’t get: adding more crap to JavaScript doesn’t make things easier, it makes things more complex. Think about it: the entire web is depending on a language that was thrown together in like 10 days and renamed from LiveScript to it would contain the word 'Java' because Java was the new hotness back in the day even though it had nothing to do with Jsva. And now we’re going to add all of the stuff we didn't think about back then when JavaScript was considered a weird, fringe toy language, when the most complex thing anyone did was image rollovers. JavaScript didn't "win" because it was great; it won because it good enough and we were literally stuck with it. Not everyone wants good enough; some people want an excellent, purpose built language for the web with all of the goodies we’ve come to expect on Day 1--no polyfills, no hacks, no waiting for a years long standards process to run its course. I’m looking forward to the Dart conference next month to see what’s next: https://www.dartlang.org/events/2015/summit/ https://www.dartlang.org/events/2015/summit/.

frowaway001 12y ago
> Not everyone wants good enough; some people want an excellent, purpose built language for the web with all of the goodies we’ve come to expect on Day 1--no polyfills, no hacks, no waiting for a years long standards process to run its course. Yes, absolutely; and Dart just doesn't fit that bill.