On 5/29/2012 10:56 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
On May 29, 2012, at 10:08 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Mark S. Miller<[email protected]> wrote:
Language design and extension is a complex process. Being supportive of multiple use cases generally makes a new
feature more valuable and more likely to be adopted. It also makes for smaller, more consistent languages. Socially,
support of multiple use cases helps a feature achieve consensus support. A "mustache" proposal that only
allows "foo=bar" may not do enough to get the support behind it that is needed to make the cut. Neither
might a proposal that lacks "foo=bar". The fact that there are multiple perspectives isn't bad, and it
doesn't mean that we are "designing by committee". It is simply how language design works.
I'm pretty sure that we all understand that this is a complex process. I
certainly appreciate all of the work that TC 39 puts into the process,
and appreciate even more that there is transparency in the form of
strawman proposals. Multiple perspectives are definitely good, and I'm
just trying to provide another.
Finally, I'm skeptical of any self-styled representation of "normal developers" that isn't backed
up with data. In particular, on this other proposals I generally receive "community" feedback that
span all perspectives on the issues. (BTW, on the proposal in question, the positive feedback seems to be
running quite a bit ahead of the negative). At least some of it seems to come from relatively "normal
programmers" (although I have no idea how anybody would actually define that term). I'm familiar with
the issues you raise, their general theme is something that we routinely discuss in TC39 (and really in any
competent language design team). You really hould assume that we have considered and factored them into our
proposals. It is perfectly fair, try to demonstrate why we made the wrong trade-offs in a proposal but this
will seldom work if you only consider one dimension of the design. Try to be the most comprehensively
reasoned voice, not the loudest.
As well you should be. What sort of data are you looking for? I'd be
willing to bet that there wouldn't be a data set that would satisfy your
parameters. I know that I'm speaking from 15 years of nonstop web
development experience, at companies both small and large, and have
worked with people of all skill levels. I definitely have not spent the
past several years designing JavaScript or evolving it. And even though
I am 100% sure that you tend to discuss a lot of issues in your meetings
that we would care about, I don't think it serves anyone if we all
assume that you all have already thought of everything and understand
all of the issues.
Tab and I have, IMO, presented our points of view in a very calm,
measured, rational way. That seems to be in stark contrast to a lot of
the conversations that happen on this mailing list and others. I would
hope that such feedback would be welcomed rather than eschewed.
Allen
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
--
___________________________
Nicholas C. Zakas
http://www.nczonline.net
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
