More Info On Google's Alternative To JavaScript

I'm Not There (1956) writes "Last week the news came in that Google is supposed to unveil 'Dart,' a new programming language for browser-based apps. Now an internal email from late last year describes this project as the 'high risk/high reward' path [of Google's browser development strategy]. Apps in this new language will run in a VM on browsers that support it, and can be translated to JS for other browsers. 'Performance, developer usability, and ability to be tooled' are the main characteristics of the language." The email notes that Google will be working on ECMAScript Harmony in the near term, but they describe the project as ultimately doomed by "fundamental problems" with ECMAScript. It's interesting that Google took part in abandoning ECMAScript 4, which would have been almost fully backward compatible with current implementations while solving most of the "fundamental problems" Google claims require a brand new language to fix.

It isn't really interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

that Google is taking part in this abandonment. ECMAScript 4 will never be passed. The effort has long since been abandoned because the proposed changes were thought to be too complex, according to Doug Crockford.

The changes proposed in ES4 were ultimately abandoned as a group. Even if they're reintegrated over time it'll probably take far too long for Google to be happy with the adjustments to the "fundamental problems" they cited.

Re:What exactly is wrong with javascript?

[juancn]

There are a few things wrong with it. Which do not matter much for small-ish code bases, but tend to be a pain for larger products. For me most revolve around the interpreted nature and the lack of types.

Off the top of my head:

• Performance: Current javascript engines are as fast as they get for an untyped language. There isn't much more you can do to speed it up. Even optional type annotations would open a large number of potential optimizations.
• Tooling: For large projects, not having much type information is painful. Refactoring code becomes a guessing game (some tools do it better than others).
• Load time: You have to compile javascript each time a page loads. This adds some latency that could be minimized with a proper
• Lack of integral/decimal numbers: This might not seem like much of a problem, but handling money with only floating point numbers is painful. Also, things such as WebGL would benefit from having better ways to deal with raw data.

Don't get me wrong, Javascript is a great little language, but it is by no means perfect.

Re:Sick of "Google is Evil" claims

[Enderandrew]

Not to mention:

Microsoft censored everything and didn't try to work around it at all. They also agreed to let China have full access to Microsoft controlled email.
Yahoo handed over email as well, which led to a journalist going to jail.
RIM hands over messages and email to help put dissidents in jail.

Google doesn't. Which one do you hear getting called evil each day? Why are the others getting a free pass?

Stop letting astroturfers win.