| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Javascript speedJavascript speedPosted Sep 3, 2008 0:46 UTC (Wed) by gouyou (subscriber, #30290)In reply to: Javascript speed by epa Parent article: The Google Chrome comic book
I would much prefer everybody integrating a nicer language like python in the browser. Javascript is useful but the syntax and libraries are dreadful.
(Log in to post comments)
Javascript speed Posted Sep 3, 2008 4:27 UTC (Wed) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link]
On libraries, I'll agree...somewhat. It's only recently been taken seriously as a language, so library support is uneven. But I rather like Javascript's semantics; it's like a curly-braced Lisp.
Javascript speed Posted Sep 3, 2008 20:09 UTC (Wed) by robertm (subscriber, #20200) [Link]
Only without all the parts that make Lisp different from all the other scripting languages out there: a useful code/data correspondence; lexically scoped non-local returns; an object system based on generic functions instead of message passing; resumable exceptions; dynamically-scoped variables.
Javascript speed Posted Sep 3, 2008 21:40 UTC (Wed) by flewellyn (subscriber, #5047) [Link]
Fair enough. Still, it's got closures and good function/object polymorphism.
Javascript speed Posted Sep 4, 2008 8:05 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
And macros. Don't forget macros. (I suppose this is a consequence of
the 'useful code/data correspondence' that you did mention.)
Javascript speed Posted Sep 3, 2008 19:00 UTC (Wed) by tjc (guest, #137) [Link]
It could be a *lot* worse. As a Python programmer you should at least appreciate the fact that semicolon statement terminators are optional.
Myself, I like the first-class funtions, and the somewhat oddball prototype-based objects. I'm less thrilled with the way it silently converts objects from one type to another, in sometimes unexpected ways, but most scripting languages do this to some extent.
|
|
||||||||||||