JavaScript is one of my preferred programming languages. It’s thin, flexible, yet you can create really complex stuff with it. So any news about JavaScript 2.0 is an important one, moreover when it’s Brendan Eich (the creator of JavaScript) who talks about it:
http://developer.mozilla.org/presentations/xtech2006/javascript/
Somehow, however, seeing those slides I got the feeling that JavaScript 2.0 will look more like Java than previously. Which is a good and a bad thing simultaneously. Having stronger language constructions can make slightly more difficult to craft applications from scratch; on the other side, it can make JavaScript code more maintainable. There’s a tradeoff between maintainability and readability on one side, and coolness and speed of creation on the other. The current version of JavaScript, in my opinion, brings a balance between all these options.
Will JavaScript 2.0 be the language of Web 2.0? Without any doubt. Will I like it? Now that’s another problem. Programming means having fun. If the language brings more verbosity, or makes things more difficult, it can stop the fun. And that’s not good for a popular programming language.
Update: here’s a nice paper showing the rationale behind JavaScript 2.0. (local copy if the remote link is unavailable)
Similar Posts:
- Now this is ridiculous
- On the Need of Minimalist Polyglots
- Null References
- Rails vs. Django
- iPhone Apps without Objective-C
- Thoughts about Google’s “Go” Programming Language
- Paris on Rails: Morning
2 Comments
05.31.2007
I think they missed out on the point of most Javascript, its glue code to make small client side things work right.
To turn that into a client side programming environment to support rich application development is a real stretch and honestly I don’t see the point. There is Java in that position already, there is flash, and shortly there will be apollo (html + actionscript) and silverlight (xaml + .net + dlr). I honestly can’t see the point. Javascript does a terrific job as glue, I’d hate to see them take that away
05.31.2007
I don’t agree with you, Adam; JavaScript must evolve because the web has evolved. However, I hope that it will evolve nicely.
The “glue” thing you mention was also what M$ said about Visual Basic (and VBScript) regarding COM! You should only use VB or VBScript to “glue” together COM components. However, the truth was that VBScript was used to develop fully-fledged applications (you know what I mean ;). It is normal for JavaScript to evolve, because the web has evolved, and Apollo + Silverlight are just more attempts to “insert” an app inside the browser (and even worse, they are proprietary solutions!). The app IS the browser, and Google is the new Microsoft; take a look at this: http://gears.google.com/.