This is apparently not a joke: http://www.nomorejavascript.com/
-
This post is deleted!
-
Ruby copied PHP.
[code]
<?php function my($arg1) { return "arg1:{$arg1}"; } [/code]
-
Most dynamic languages do this:
- Python: implicitly returns None
- Perl: the last statement executed in a function is the return value
- PHP: implicitly returns NULL
- JavaScript: implicitly returns undefined
-
I mentioned DOM in the comments but it was "in review" last I check. Let's see if they've approved it...
What a shock. They haven't approved it.
-
Apparently. It has now disappeared completely.
And now it's on display. I guess they decided they should put some negative comments up there.
-
And easier image uploads. At least now that they turned off auto-mirroring of images.
I've never complained about the stuff Discourse actually improved on. The problem is they threw out the baby with the bathwater.
-
Most programming languages are not designed to run in a sandbox
That leaves still leaves Lua and a few other options. (ActiveX-flavor VB!)
-
Lucky. Mine apparently was deleted outright.
It wasn't even that aggressive, I just pointed out that "replacing" jQuery would require replacing DOM as well, and that's a HUGE change of scope compared to replacing JavaScript itself.
-
@Intercourse said:
It would have been so much better if you posted with a Mr. Burns avatar.
Since my comment is now publicly visible, it has been Burnsified.
-
Nothing like an in-joke that only a few people from one small part of the internet would get. I approve.
-
Now their page is flooded with comments on how half-baked their idea is.
I am in the wrong business. I should be in the business of starting bullshit Kickstarter campaigns for shit that will never get off the ground. If a guy can get >$50K to make potato salad, what could go wrong?
-
@Intercourse said:
Nothing like an in-joke that only a few people from one small part of the internet would ge
For now. Perhaps one day Mr. Burns will be a well-known internet entity associated with TDWTF, like Anonymous and 4chan.
-
For now. Perhaps one day Mr. Burns will be a well-known internet entity associated with TDWTF, like Anonymous and 4chan.
And then we'll have to worry about Fox coming after us.
-
Today, TDWTF. Tomorrow, the world.
-
Is there actually a kickstarter, or are they just trying to sample the amount of interest for one? I didn't click the CTA.
-
-
It is a pre-Kickstarter page to gauge interest. Which is like a serious problem with commitment as Kickstarter is entirely devoted to gauging (and funding) interests.
-
@Intercourse said:
It is a pre-Kickstarter page to gauge interest. Which is like a serious problem with commitment as Kickstarter is entirely devoted to gauging (and funding) interests.
It is very enterprisy though.
"We must gauge interest in gauging interest in and funding our idiotic project."
-
They're doing it ass-backwards. They should sell Mozilla or Chromium on it first. Either one of those would get the ball rolling a hundred times better than a kickstarter, which can't even guarantee delivery without getting Mozilla or Chromium on board.
Then they need an expert in browser Add-Ons to implement it in all browsers in Add-On form. Otherwise there's no hope in hell of adoption. Again, not sure how a kickstarter could help here.
(Ironically, step 2 there means they almost certainly have to write a runtime for their Ruby variant in JavaScript, because Chrome Add-Ons only allow JS and Mozilla Add-Ons are far easier to write if they are in JavaScript. So: mission accomplished.)
-
The multiple language runtimes would add bloat to the browser
Depends on how you implement it. AFAIK IE still supports multiple scripting languages, because they built hooks into the browser to support external engines.
-
"We must gauge interest in gauging interest in and funding our idiotic project."
"Let's do a Kickstarter to fund a website to keep track of our 'gauging interest in a Kickstarter' website."
-
Then they need an expert in browser Add-Ons to implement it in all browsers in Add-On form. Otherwise there's no hope in hell of adoption.
Unless this add-on would be installed by default, you are still going to have a huge adoption problem. Back in the days of Flash being everywhere, lots of people did not even know to install it. It has to be built-in functionality to the browser or it will be a non-starter. That would lead them to writing an interpreter in a language already supported by all browsers and loading it on page load. So...basically JavaScript. Perhaps after that step, they might be able to get somewhere.
And this is looking past the fact that most of their reasoning is BS that most people dismiss immediately.
-
Then they need an expert in browser Add-Ons to implement it in all browsers in Add-On form
The wouldn't even need to get MS' help to do that in IE: just write a scripting engine that uses the existing MS stuff. As a bonus, it then would work in Windows Scripting Host etc.
-
I'm laying down "minimum", I never guaranteed "sufficient".
-
Fair enough.
Also, in case no one else has pointed it out: http://opalrb.org/
-
The wouldn't even need to get MS' help to do that in IE: just write a scripting engine that uses the existing MS stuff. As a bonus, it then would work in Windows Scripting Host etc.
Right but there aren't a ton of people qualified to do that, was my point. Finding them won't be easier. Employing them won't be cheap.
-
Unless they have a language and interpreter expert behind their movement, it will not go beyond this website built using JavaScript.
-
Right but there aren't a ton of people qualified to do that, was my point.
Oh, that's true. I just meant that starting with IE means you don't need Google's (or, obviously, Microsoft's) buy-in.
-
@Intercourse said:
Unless they have a language and interpreter expert behind their movement,it will not go beyond this website built using JavaScript.FTFY.
-
Good call.
-
In the current browser environment, I bet they can get MS's buy-in a lot quicker than Mozilla's.
-
Most dynamic languages do this:
- Python: implicitly returns None
- Perl: the last statement executed in a function is the return value
- PHP: implicitly returns NULL
- JavaScript: implicitly returns undefined
Static languages:
- Ada: gives you a firm slap on the wrist and refuses to compile
- Haskell: everything's an expression so it's all good
-
In the current browser environment, I bet they can get MS's buy-in a lot quicker than Mozilla's.
Probably true, but Mozilla would have it in users' hands faster.
-
Personally I like the idea itself (replacing javascript), but not the way they propose.
I mean, serriously, they are fuc**** wrong trying to do "Ruby in browser". It will not be faster, and ruby also allows spagetthicode.
And we have to solve the problem from the root of it : The DOM is bullshit. Once this has been solved, we can move further.
-
I owe them an apology, they did indeed publish my comment.
EDIT: maybe I spoke too soon:
like the beginning of many changes, there are flaws all over the place. The validate that the movement is wanted.
WTF kind of logic is THAT?
-
I am going to guess that when they said:
like the beginning of many changes, there are flaws all over the place. The validate that the movement is wanted.
That was their way of saying: "We have no idea what you just said, so we bow out."
-
In case they don't approve it, I just replied, "I guess I can't argue with that 'logic'." Now I wash my hands of these idiots.
-
They suggest Ruby, then some guy in the comments said that if they used Python as their template he would be onboard and they agreed with that also. They don't know WTF they want, they just know they do not want JS.
-
WTF kind of logic is THAT?
Discologic?
@Intercourse said:
They suggest Ruby, then some guy in the comments said that if they used Python as their template he would be onboard and they agreed with that also. They don't know WTF they want, they just know they do not want JS.
To be fair, Python is at least strongly typed (no implicit type conversion). It's a rite of passage for JS developers to be burned by something like:
totalAmt = subTotal + salesTax;
when they forget to convert one or the other to a number first.
-
I swear I've read this crap before.
Anyway for all it odd things, JS is probably one of my favourite languages. Keep away from the WTF parts of it and you are fine.
-
Going to register http://www.nomorephp.com...
-
-
-
there are. they are hard to find, but the are there.
-
and i was going to post that image.
-
I quite like how it requires you actually know it to write good code. I also like the flexibility, something I miss when doing .NET.
-
Discologic?
@Intercourse said:
They suggest Ruby, then some guy in the comments said that if they used Python as their template he would be onboard and they agreed with that also. They don't know WTF they want, they just know they do not want JS.
To be fair, Python is at least strongly typed (no implicit type conversion). It's a rite of passage for JS developers to be burned by something like:
totalAmt = subTotal + salesTax;
when they forget to convert one or the other to a number first.
Something Microsoft did a decent job at.
-
I liked CoffeeScript pretty well when I did one project with it. Would be sweet to have native browser support for things like that instead of compiling CoffeeScript to JavaScript which made debugging a mess.
-
-
We tried TypeScript but it had just been released and there was a lack of starter documentation. Gave up after a couple days.
CoffeeScript was far from perfect, but it did address our major complaints about JavaScript syntax.