I don’t doubt it’s quite fast and going to get 5x faster over the next decade. It’s just that I don’t want to write any damned code using it!! I’ve got a really nice simple language that does everything I need already. And when it doesn’t I’ve got another language already too.
Cas 
I cannot find any interpretation of your comments that I would agree with. My main issue here is that too many OO only programmers (or with little experience in alternate abstractions) think they don’t need any extra tools in their toolbox as it is, even when they’re attempting to jump through convoluted hoops to get something implemented.
Well, would you care to name of few? And I don’t mean this in an argumentative tone…I’m truly curious. I cannot think of more than a handful of potentially viable options that I would consider acceptable.
Not wanting it in Java. Fine. But where’s “the pain like Javascript” part coming from? I fail to see how extending a provided base class to get actor support coupled with marking root methods with @pausable is much of a burden or some kind of syntax pollution.
Well it “proves” nothing. But it indicates that if you know java and want an actor framework, then you don’t necessarily need to run out and learn or create a new language. My point was that I don’t find your statement: “it is not as good as having the language itself do it for you (like in Erlang or my own language)” to be generally true.
Erlang is a very cool language that virtually nobody should go bother to learn. Is your next project code that runs on a bank of servers that requires 100% uptime? Fine, check-out Erlang. Otherwise it would appear pretty far down my list of language one should get a working knowledge of.
WRT: Actors. They are not black-magic that solve any real modern concurrency problems other than a simple model for the programmer. (which, of course, I’m not spitting on)
I’d agree that simply having first class functions != functional programming. On the other hand I don’t only consider “purely functional” languages to be the only ones that qualify. (This is sorta like the OO vs OO argument)
Today expect slight showers with unseasonably warm weather…
Pretty sure longino likes being angry more than being informed or correct, so good luck with the argument.
If you’re looking for actors in java, look no further than Akka. Won’t get the “built in to the language” feeling (i.e. an infix operator for message send) until you use it in scala, but you still get the actor model, remote nodes and supervisors and all. Also has Software Transactional Memory, which is really yummy for some concurrency problems.
Seems more like a convoluted mess to me. Transactional memory is not a good solution. It is just a sign that so-called “scientists” are running out of ideas.
And where I say something else is not needed?
Actors have properties that imperative languages (including Javascript) can’t provide, such as encapsulation between actors. In Java (or Javascript) it would always be possible to change the state of an object. But you could always implement a Runnable and call it an Actor, I guess.
There are differences between a language like Erlang and a “framework” that looks more like a bandaid for an hemorrhage.
Concurrency is a necessisity at a language level.
That explains a lot about your opinions on Javascript.
That is not important. I am just pointing out that “dynamic languages” fans aren’t really programming in a different way. They are programming imperatively, stuffing functions inside of objects.
Just like they would do in Java, but stupider.
Rant now descending into farce Time to stop!
Cas
Comments like this show how little you really know about concurrency in JavaScript, because your just flat wrong. In JavaScript objects cannot be shared between threads. All communication is performed using messages, which are copied when sent, and this cannot be circumvented. It’s just like Erlang.
One thing I do hate about JavaScript is the name. It’s much better name then the original name, ‘LiveScript’, but lots of people presume it’s related to Java, when it’s not.
[quote=“princec,post:106,topic:37455”]
It was an obvious troll from the get-go. The only reason I’m reading it now is curiosity to see how it kept going so long.
Troll it might be but many people share the sentiment But now it’s descending into people arguing about each other’s abilities/knowledge etc which is only going to turn nasty. Moderator!
Cas
My entire company now develops only in Javascript, both for client and server code. There are some issues with it, sure, but everything you’re saying is ignorant. We use node.js for everything, which makes inheritance, class file importing, etc. possible with very little fuss. Also, servers running on top of node and with mongo are faster than Rails, Java, etc. servers. It’s the absolute best option for games due to JS being so good at event-driven code.
We’re making some very high quality mobile titles with it.
Whereas your endless pissing and moaning and griping really advances the state of the art, doesn’t it? Geez, you can’t even put the effort into trolling well.
You, sir, are a moderator You might want to review that ancient PM about it.
As from my understanding it is possible to create an immutable Object in Javascript. So you can’t modify any inner states without using accessors.
Adobe dumping flash for “devices”, will focus on HTML5.
Adobe’s Flash Surrender Proves Steve Jobs And Apple Were Right All Along With HTML5
You know what that means. HTML5 = JavaScript.
Really, you guys should get a wider perspective than just “doesn’t compile”. :
Also Microsoft is Killing Silverlight too. They’re also putting their weight behind HTML5 (e.g. as seen with Metro).
HTML5 is huge. It’s sad some people don’t realize how big it is. I’ve been web developing since 1995, and been fighting limitations of the browser, trying to push the limits. Seeing what HTML5 offers is just mind-blowing, the limitations of what you can do on a web page are almost gone. In combination with CSS3, JavaScript…web pages become a very powerful view form for a lot of things. Canvas provides you with that extra you’d otherwise need Java/Flash for.
In a few years, 3-5, nobody will ever consider using Java/Flash for anything on a web page. What you need proprietary technologies for today will be standardized via HTMLx.
HTML5 is only one stepping stone towards this. HTML6 will come as well, and the evolution will continue. The trends are clear, both for HTML and Java (web embed), HTML is evolving at a faster pace than ever before, while Java seems to be pretty much stagnant, for a long long time. The attempted JavaFX is only a proof of that, they cannot fix it, or maybe don’t care, and browser makers don’t care much for Applet support (Firefox removing Applet support? http://www.java-gaming.org/topics/mozilla-planning-to-kill-java-applets/24849/view.html).
Seriously… people should stop hating and start loving JavaScript, because it will play such a big role in this trend. Not knowing JavaScript in a few years will be equivalent to “not able to make web pages”, and let’s face it, most of what programmers do nowadays is web page related.
I think I will ultimately love it, myself. As soon as Eclipse development becomes as awesome for Javascript as it is for Java. And when it gets a few more bells and whistles for performance like the equivalent of Unsafe, direct bytebuffers, synchronized & concurrency stuff built in, etc. Can’t be that long. I’m going to stay the hell away from HTML5 though. That’s for the designers and luvvies of this world, not robots like me.
Cas
CSS3…when it is fully supported in IE11+ the web could look much better.
HTML6? I thought HTML5 will be the last draft and anything after will just be seen as an addon to html5. Is that idea allready dumped?
Well, eventually they’ll make HTML6 The web will evolve, beyond HTML5.
appel,
Does HTML 5 support Open GL? Does it allow full handling of both left and right mouse button events?