Just what we needed
Too many existing versions? Obvious solution - invent yet another one. But make it different enough to throw away the existing investment.
If you want to standardise, standardise on JQuery. Build it into the browser.
Make jquery native?
Not sure if JQuery should or should not be in the browser. But what I am seeing here is that developers are doing what developers love doing and that is reinventing the wheel. OK it may be a better wheel at the end of the day and it will allow developers to achieve things they never thought possible. But I'll tell you right now it won't be good enough. Nothing is ever good enough to last and some developer somewhere will be hatching a plan to replace it while another group of developers will be saying what a rubbish idea that new idea will be and yet another group will be saying 'enough already what's wrong with what we've got?'.
How many hundreds must there be for C++, Java, etc... true a standard library would be nice but really this is not a problem.
Spoken like someone who doesn't have to work wih js regularly.
So dart is what that e-mail meant when Google said they would have to licence or find another way around Java.
Not even a little bit.
And lo, it is shit.
jQuery is for pussy designers who try to become programmers...
it's for designers who can't be arsed with too much programming and dread the thought of becoming a developer...
Other JS frameworks:
Google Web Toolkit
That's 21, right there. 22 with jQuery. Back to school with you, slow ones.
jQuery is for developers who want to get on with developing the application, not spend weeks re-inventing the wheel and trying to get the damn thing working with every version of IE back to 6.
Developers who think producing a working application is more important than showing off how macho your coding skills are.
The client doesn't want it perfect, he wants it Tuesday.
I'd argue that any framework is for people that don't wish to continually reinvent the wheel but to spend their time on perceived value-add.
JQuery is for web devs on ridiculously short deadlines who can't be arsed re-inventing the wheel for the 15th time on 5 different browser platforms and want to go home to their real lives at 5pm.
Beer, coz I'd rather have that than spend extra hours hacking code.
No standard library means we need a new language?
I think its fair to say that if you feel that the only way to solve a problem is to create an entirely new programming language, the odds are good that you have failed to understand the problem.
Compare with Java, wrap a poor language in a extensive standard library and require that lib to be in every implementation. In a very real sense those libs *are Java*, the actual language just glue. All the value is in having a consistent library package that's actually useful.
It's the design pattern problem too
Though I guess if there were a standard library, that would set the tone for design patterns. So solving the one would solve the other.
Great, a new language that has been forked from the beginning: is it Dart or Dash?
I thought the 'greatness' of open source was choice. Now they're complaining there's too much choice? Maybe Google should google 'reality' and see what comes up...
Standards should increase choice
Surely Google's idea is that this should become a new standard? Real choice depends on avoiding proprietary lock-in of the sort favoured by Microsoft and Apple.
"should google 'reality' and see what comes up.."
lots and lots of ads Im sure :)
Google are not pro 'open source' though. It's just something they like to flap around in front of your face! At least MS and Apple don't have such pretensions.
Been there, got the t-shirt...
...Anyone remember "embrace, extend, extinguish"?
<-- Most appropriate icon.
Like a hole in the head
http://xkcd.com/927/ had it right.
A dart is a small object that is inherently unstable in flight and requires great skill and a bit of luck (or several pints of beer) in order to get it even close to the desired target.
You're not very good at darts. are you?
If a new language is really needed, then ...
* it needs to be developed and controlled by an independent standards body, eg W3C
* it needs to be specifically designed to ensure that browser extensions can continue to detect and block any spyware, unwanted animations and other nuisances that unenlightened webmasters insist on using to clutter their sites.
* it needs to be easily supported unencumbered in all browsers
Google's aims are going to be the complete opposite of both of the above.
Google's slogan these days is fast becoming "Mainly do evil". Google constantly watches us, but nobody watches the watchers.
w3c? No thanks
If we let the W3c run thi s thing it will be 10 years minimum before the 1st version ever sees the light of day....
Let google run it and it will probably be ready by the end of the year.
"Let google run it and it will probably be ready by the end of the year."
Sweet Jesus, another one?
WTF is up with Google lately - Dart, WebP and (to a lesser extent) SPDY are all Chocolate Factory inventions to "improve" the web, but they're all single-vendor solutions designed to usurp existing multi-vendor ones. If successful they'll drag the web back to the bad old days.
(Incidentally the fact they're open source doesn't matter a damn. I could open source my own image format tomorrow, but that doesn't mean I should expect Mozilla and MS to implement it).
The more powerful a company becomes, the more it ignores the very standards that helped it grow. Same as it ever was.
Exactly.... I designed my own O,O encapsulated, with interfaces, yada, yada UI framework.
For the vast majority of the web apps I build I rarely have to extend and I manipulate the layout using CSS. Funny, but I still get a kick out of creating many instances of a class, doing something inside one instance, then calling the class (as a static) via a method that tells me which instance did what. Wish I could do that in C#.
jQuery was OK, but now everyone is extending all over the shop, there's hackholes everywhere.
But if it COULD be got to work
it would have all kinds of advantages in terms of speed, reliability and security. It does sound to be designed down at the machine level, so it *should*, in principle, avoid the problems created by inept implementations of high level languages and the usual accumulation of bad coding / layers of ill-thought out crap that creates hard to detect loopholes in security.
And it would undercut some of the competitive advantages of Apple's walled garden, thereby possibly keeping the web a more open place.
What's not to like?
Stop over inflating the BS and read the E-Mail
Seems like another case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing.
It has its frameworks, but hasn't every language, and wont Google's new language end up with frameworks too? After all frameworks are just higher level abstractions designed by developers to make things easier for their particular intended task.
What's wrong with Silverlight and JavaFX? How is Dash/Dart significantly different from those previous efforts (other than it's made by Google)?
Oops, forgot my favourite example: Macromedia Flash, The Buggy, The Slow and The Ugly.
Kudos to Apple for having balls to fight this monster off the Internet.
You're not wrong in the analysis, but the bottom-line reason is less honourable: Free Flash games compete unacceptably with non-free iTunes downloads.
Probably also as a result of multiple OSX hacking contests, where Flash was popular as an attack vector. By the way, I have Steam version on Machinarium, it's a great game written in Flash AFAIK, but I was never able to beat it on Macbook Air in single run, because MBA overheats half through the game and makes it impossible to advance past the Owl/electrician level. Similar problem with a lot of Flash content on the mentioned MBA, Flash eats all available CPU cycles, and for what?
Sure, that's a flash problem, not improper thermal design.
Yes, flash is intensive on the Mac, but that is because (as adobe has pointed out repeatedly) Apple won't provide similar interfaces to what MS provides to accelerate it. That said, no matter HOW intensive it is it shouldn't overheat. If it is, then it's a manufacture or design defect in the hardware.
1. Yes, thermal design in MBA is total crap.
2. I don't like Apple very much for what they did with MBA and iPad 2 3G and iPhone etc (I won't comment further 'cause it's off topic)
3. Now how much interactivity/flashiness/poppines/social_friendliness and other crap do you need when surfing for information on some subject? I don't need Flash here and there all over the place just to read one damn article. Same holds true for Java applets, silverlight applets and Darth applets when they get there. Moreover, why do you need Web2.0/AJAX and other features to just read email (I mean YOU, gmail). Me doesn't. I was perfectly ok with gmail's basic HTML mode when I could't access it by other means (I mean _console_ email application called mutt).
I'm simplifying here, but:
LISP - designed by one person
C - designed by one person
Tcl - designed by one person
Tcl/Expect - designed by one person
Python - designed by one person
Ruby - designed by one person
Java (Oak) - designed by Sun
FORTRAN - designed by IBM
COBOL - designed by committee
P.S. Probably Dart will be OK, it's too early to judge without seeing actual Dart code. If it's easy and fun to learn and fun and easy to program with, it may eventually exhibit The Python Effect
VHDL - designed by the DoD. Many consider it to be shitty but I kinda like it.
Of the ones I know about:
'C' although invented by one person, is now steered by committee - and good luck getting K&R C to compile on a C99 compiler.
C++ was designed by one person; but, again, these days steered by committee.
In my opinion most lanuages start out, good then get screwed by comittee
With the exception of C in you great languages list, what exactly is the adoption of the rest combined? Less that 2% I would guess. Being a great language from the stand point of design doesn't mean it worth the investment is using it if some other general purpose, more widely used language exists.
Anyone remember when RoR was suppose to to kill PHP? Years later, PHP is still going strong while RoR usage is pretty flat, said for some high profile sites.
Googles language will probably go the same way.
OK you cant as yet write write ECMA standard arse wiping facilities but using 1/10th the software engineering disciplines used to write Unix (because its been done so the lessons have been learned) it should be possible to write enterprise cloud systems in the browser for the browser if only people would use the tools available and not spend their lives fighting to not learn how something else can be made to work.
Just to clarify my point: not every language designed by one person is great (example - C++, shitty from the beginning).
Regarding ACNE^H^H^H^HECMAScript - thanks for educating me, I didn't know that Eich designed it alone, but then my first statement holds true.
C is great, and I regularly get my hands dirty with its K&R variant (hello, PA-RISC HP-UX!), ANSI C and ISO C99. I see no major problems compiling K&R code with gcc though. Can you elaborate, please? There's another problem - how do you compile ANSI C code with HP-UX bundled K&R compiler, for instance? Go buy ANSI version? Try to build gcc with K&R (well, I can do that, can you?)?