Lurker here, I also agree with most points expressed by T.J. Crowder. JavaScript is a scripting language that can serve many purposes. I think the addition of class and async/await only make the language better, and if optional static types were included (a la TypeScript or ES4) it would probably make JavaScript the best scripting language.
I also think the Node ecosystem is a mess, and that Electron is a plague, but those points are completely unrelated to the language itself. There are projects such as https://nodekit.io/ that aim to provide a bloat-free universal Electron / Cordova replacement. On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:00 PM, Jacob Pratt <jhpratt...@gmail.com> wrote: > Mostly a lurker here. I fully agree with your points, and also use JS for > non-web projects. > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 07:34 T.J. Crowder <tj.crow...@farsightsoftware.com> > wrote: > >> Lurkers: If I'm alone in this, please say so. If I'm **not** alone, >> please say so (publicly this time). Either way, I'm done as of this message >> other than linking back to it. >> >> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 11:33 AM, kai zhu >> <kaizhu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > there is no foreseeable future where javascript will be a better tool >> > than java/c++/python/etc. for non web-related projects. there is no >> > foreseeable future where employers would hire nodejs-developers to >> > work on non web-related projects >> >> This is where we differ (well, one place we differ), as I've said many >> times before, and others have said many times before. That future is now. >> >> How we got here is irrelevant. Where we **are** is that JavaScript is a >> general-purpose programming language good for a lot more than just >> web-related work. And "web" technologies are used for a lot more than just >> the web, witness all those mobile app frameworks using HTML/CSS/JavaScript, >> Windows store apps, Electron, etc. It's also a good language for writing >> *nix shell scripts and command-line utilities, particularly now that it has >> `async`/`await`. There are at least a dozen JavaScript engines for doing >> embedded device work, completely removed from the web environment. And so >> on. >> >> Separately, the idea that web projects don't benefit from features like >> `class`, `async`/`await`, and meta-programming features and such is flatly >> contradicted by the evidence. >> >> But leave all that aside. We all know you don't agree with that. You've >> told us, ad nauseum. It's not that we haven't heard what you're saying, >> it's that we disagree with it. (I say "we" because I've had private >> messages from people supporting my pushback on this. I wish they'd be made >> publicly.) Taking every vague opportunity to push your view of JavaScript >> as a niche, limited language is not constructive at this point. >> Robustly-expressed differing views are an essential part of >> consensus-building, but there comes a point where one has to accept that >> one's view has not been successful *and move on*. I think frankly we're >> well past that point on this topic, and have been for a while. Specific >> input on proposals is great, including raising specific concerns with >> serialization etc. (ideally with a proposed solution, but sometimes just >> raising a concern is useful). Putting forward constructive, specific >> proposals for things you think TC39 should be acting on is great. >> Constantly trying to push a view clearly at odds with the consensus of the >> community here is just not useful, and gets in the way of useful >> conversations we could be having, including about the things you care about >> getting done. Please, please move on. >> >> And again: I think you're right that issues around JSON interop with new >> features like BigInt need focus (here, in the proposal itself, in some JSON >> working group, somewhere), and there seems to be interest in doing so. So >> if that's an area of interest for you, please contribute to that effort, >> rather than spending time beating this dead horse. >> >> I'm not going to keep writing these replies, I'll just refer to this one >> from now on. >> >> And again, lurkers, please weigh in. >> >> -- T.J. Crowder >> >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> es-discuss@mozilla.org >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > es-discuss@mozilla.org > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
