[Resending because mail from my mail host was temporarily blocked by spamcop.]
On Jul 26, 2013, at 12:29 , Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: > Steve Fink wrote: >> On Fri 26 Jul 2013 10:32:09 AM PDT, Brendan Eich wrote: >>> Norbert asked me yesterday whether we shouldn't start moving from >>> Python to JS. The obstacle historically has been lack of build-prereq >>> industry-grade "js shells" already installed. Does node change that? >> >> Not in my opinion. It's common to be on a system with python and >> without Node. > > Ok, that is overriding. Why? Anybody who wants to build SpiderMonkey or Firefox has to install a set of tools first - we don't expect to be able to build these systems on a computer that was just pulled out of the box. Why can't that set of tools include a prebuilt JS shell? >> I don't see the win in eating our neighbor's dog food, as tasty as it may be. > > It's not that simple, of course. We'd be eating the Node and ECMA-262 > dogfoods as well. Could be worth it, absent the overriding problem. Or we could try and figure out what would have to be added to ECMA-262 and the SpiderMonkey-based JS shell to support tools development. Batteries included? >> (2) writing JS still feels clunky in comparison to writing >> Python, > > What's missing in your experience? Yep, that's the kind of information that dogfooding is meant to surface :-) Norbert _______________________________________________ dev-tech-js-engine-internals mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-tech-js-engine-internals
