On Sat, May 7, 2011 at 2:22 AM, Peter Michaux <petermich...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think that this is what compilers and projects like coffeescript are > for. In my opinion, JavaScript itself doesn't need this new syntax. > > I think improving JavaScript as a compilation target is a good goal.
This argument comes up time and again: "We don't need to make JavaScript a good programming language, just a good compilation target". I think it's really wrong-headed. First, JavaScript is a language used by millions of people as a programming language, and we should give them a great language to program in. Second, JavaScript as source rather than target has been a huge enabler of the Web as an open platform, which I certainly don't want to move away from. So, even though we've worked hard in the module system to better support compilation to JavaScript, I think the our fundamental goal should be to make JavaScript a great language to write all kinds of programs in. > For example, a real "lambda" with guaranteed proper tail calls, no > "arguments", no need for "return", etc would make is possible to > compile Scheme to JavaScript without using something inefficient like > trampolines. It would also open up recursive programming options in > plain JavaScript so it would be win-win. And hey, it turns out we've done this too -- at least with the -> syntax. :) -- sam th sa...@ccs.neu.edu _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
