Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: > On 12/14/10 9:25 AM, Sean Kelly wrote: > > Adam Ruppe Wrote: > >> > >> Client side scripting sucks. It's garbage. Slow, incompatible, unreliable, > >> and a > >> piece of junk platform in general - it does very little that's > >> interesting. That's > >> not even getting into the language itself.
It's up to you what you're doing with the language/platform. I created some pretty decent almost-MVC apps with JS in the browser, using a lot of the language's features. If you're just hacking some stuff together.. ay.. then you might not get into the language itself. Anyways, your fault. :) > > It totally sucks, but it does scale better than executing everything > > server-side. Always a matter of using the right tools for the job. > Surprisingly, it doesn't. Facebook is reducing its client-side > Javascript to a minimum in favor of server-side code. Reason? Speed. You > can't control user's OS, browser, and hardware platform, but you can > control your own. I've never heard of that before. I can also not really imagine it, given that Facebook is one of the providers of the most-included JS cross-site snippets? Ever heard of FBML? The only thing they reduced was the *markup* code which was slowing some browsers down when displaying a lot of items in the feed. Javascript isn't a bottleneck here, they really did a good job on the architecture of the whole site. D as server-side was once something I tried to achieve, but it wasn't the right time. It would have been perfect as backend for a full-blown JS browser app, only handling & shuffling data around, sending JSON back and forth. Cheers, Alex