grumblingdev

9 ms·

91.
by grumblingdev 4y ago
One thing not to forget about JS is that it has made everything reverse engineerable. WebAssembly will kill this. It's quite amazing to be able to set breakpoints on any website on the internet. To see how any website does something. A
92.
by grumblingdev 4y ago
> in the late "fad" stage I mean more JS. I'm sure types will be integrated into TS. I really cannot see JS ever being supplanted. WebAssembly could change things but probably not. The only gap I see in the market is for a
93.
by grumblingdev 4y ago
By TS I really mean JS. I'm sure they will adopt types soon enough. You would agree JS will be around forever right?
94.
by grumblingdev 4y ago
I think AssemblyScript is the best example. Adding the borrow checker is quite invasive though. This guy is trying https://github.com/alshdavid/BorrowScript . I think it's a kind of fun constraint that experienced
95.
by grumblingdev 4y ago
I just find I write code in a syntax that could probably be transpiled directly to C/C++ if I followed a few rules, and that it could also run on the web or in a JIT. A dev shouldn't have to switch between syntaxes to write native
96.
by grumblingdev 4y ago
It's the most familiar to the most amount of programmers. Despite maybe Python, but that doesn't target the web so it's not ideal. I just don't see a new language being created that can be a systems language, and is also
97.
by grumblingdev 4y ago
> systems languages (as opposed to applications languages We shouldn't need such a wide separation between what is system vs application. The difference is essentially a few additional keywords and a compiler. But the simplicity com
98.
by grumblingdev 4y ago
I just wish the creator of Rust had said "I'm going to add a native compilation target and the minimal new syntax to support borrow checking to TypeScript and make interop extremely easy". Imagine that! We would have one synt
99.
by grumblingdev 4y ago
And the syntax could be backwards compatible TypeScript is what I am saying, instead of an entirely new syntax, package manager, etc.
100.
by grumblingdev 4y ago
TS would compile to assembly. AssemblyScript already compiles to web assembly as an example.
101.
by grumblingdev 4y ago
> Also, I suspect from your focus on syntax that you're new to the field of programming 10+ years including low-level embedded stuff in C/C++ and everything in between. On the contrary, I would argue that someone working in non
102.
Why are systems languages always overly complex?
19 points by grumblingdev 4y ago|57 comments