spankalee

261 ms·

2581.
by spankalee 14y ago
Thanks for the sarcasm, but I'm not sure your points stand. * Readability can be somewhat subjective. Neither Coffekup or any of the markup DSLs I've seen are inarguably much more readable than HTML. A few extra braces to closing tags do no
2582.
by spankalee 14y ago
I really, really dislike builder APIs/DSLs for HTML. HTML itself is a DSL for documents, and now UIs in general, and since something like this doesn't really add any capabilities or, very useful abstractions, that I can see, I don't see the
2583.
by spankalee 14y ago
Yes, there's really two parts to a "vanity" domain: I want a nice looking email address, and I want to own my email address no matter what service I use. It's nice to be able to also use an awesome service like Gmail on top of it. It's wort
2584.
by spankalee 14y ago
As a Googler and for much longer, a Google Apps user for my family, this is sad news. I wish they had just fixed the experience for "vanity domains" so that they didn't require all the enterprise features, and didn't let administrators have
2585.
by spankalee 14y ago
Search, Labels, Calendar and G+ integration, and the ability to choose which browser to open links in. I'm sure you can sign into your Google Apps account in iOS Gmail, you can in every other Gmail.
2586.
by spankalee 14y ago
Huh? Gmail is the Chrome app. There will never be a separate Chrome version of Gmail. Over time Gmail is using more HTML5 features, but those work on other browsers too.
2587.
by spankalee 14y ago
Gmail, Calendar, Maps, Reader, Google News, and Google Docs aren't enough? What do CSS transforms have to do with making an app feel like an app? They all work full screen, or you can open them windowed, with no chrome controls. They don't
2588.
by spankalee 14y ago
Definitely check out Web Components. It's aiming to take many of the low-level features of the MV* frameworks, like templating and data binding, directly into the browser. Angular was created with a "what would HTML look like if we could ex
2589.
by spankalee 14y ago
There might be some interesting things that could be done with TypeScript<->Dart interop. If you look at TypeScript as a way to add types to existing JS code, Dart might be able to use that type information to create interfaces for
2590.
by spankalee 14y ago
Eventually (maybe already) you wont' have to send the whole Dart framework down the wire, just the parts you use. And because it's compiled some cases will not use any "framework" at all that would need to be downloaded, they will just be c
2591.
by spankalee 15y ago
You do realize that Dart is not just a new, from-scratch language aimed at solving all of our pain points with current PLs, right? Dart is a product of it's environment, which more than Google is the current web stack and web programmers. D
2592.
by spankalee 15y ago
That snippet is showing a comparison of JavaScript and Dart as native languages. To get the Dart sample to work in browsers without native Dart, just add this tag: <script src="http://dart.googlecode.com/svn/branches/bleeding_edge
2593.
by spankalee 15y ago
GWT is pretty painful to use compared to Dart in my experience. Where in GWT you have long compiles or a very slow Dev Mode, in Dart you have extremely fast compiles and Dartium which is even faster. GWT's great when you like static typing,
2594.
by spankalee 15y ago
To clarify, by "suboptimal" I meant that the Javascript code generated by transpiling a Dart application will almost certainly be less optimal than writing that application in Javascript from the outset. My point is that this is not reall
2595.
by spankalee 15y ago
Dart can optionally compile to Javascript, so a program written in Dart will run in all browsers, albeit with a fair bit of overhead from the translation (exactly how much overhead remains to be seen, but Dart code compiled to Javascript w
2596.
by spankalee 15y ago
I think you're wrong here. Being able to compile to Javascript with good performance is a primary design goal. Of course, there's no reason a language can't both compete with and compile to Javascript, like CoffeeScript for example.
2597.
by spankalee 15y ago
Tesla is trying to run and end around on the entire auto industry while trying to turn a profit as a car manufacturer startup. I can't imagine many more difficult markets to break into. Can you blame them if they're trying something differe
2598.
by spankalee 15y ago
Sorry, I don't think you understand how OOP works. In classical inheritance, each object only contains its data and a reference to its class. The class owns the methods - they are not copied to every instance. Most uses of prototypal inheri
2599.
by spankalee 15y ago
Why would it be an "artificial" advantage? Chrome exists because Google wanted to push the web as a platform forward and encourage other browsers to evolve. That's what happened with Javascript and SPDY (_very_ rapidly with SPDY, it seems t
2600.
by spankalee 15y ago
Why is it better to have prototypal inheritance? What real problem does it solve?
2601.
by spankalee 15y ago
> Does it support prototypal inheritance? (also great) No. Dart has classical inheritance, which by the large number of classical inheritance libraries for Javascript, is still very popular even when prototypal inheritance is available.
2602.
by spankalee 15y ago
One of Dart's design goals is to be able to be compiled to efficient Javascript. That does limit some of the choices that the language designers can make, but it means that there should be good performance on all modern browsers. The VM pre
2603.
by spankalee 15y ago
This should be the top comment. If Google wants to patents to be part of a defensive portfolio to protect against lawsuits from Microsoft, then it does them no good to own the patents jointly with Microsoft. The only good owning the patents