| |||||||||||||
Reitter: Answering the question: "How do I develop an app for GNOME?"Reitter: Answering the question: "How do I develop an app for GNOME?"Posted Feb 6, 2013 18:15 UTC (Wed) by oldtomas (guest, #72579)In reply to: Reitter: Answering the question: "How do I develop an app for GNOME?" by tjc Parent article: Reitter: Answering the question: "How do I develop an app for GNOME?"
> JavaScript [...] [is] surprisingly good considering the speed at which it was created
That *was* my very point. If half of the Crockford legend is true, I tip my hat in admiration. It should have had more time to mature, thugh.
> It's delightfully eclectic, with its non-constructor based objects
That's specifically one part I *do* like about Javascript. But then there's Lua...
> And it has anonymous functions and closures, so it's a little bit lispy too
And that's another part I do like about Javascript. The core is good, but it got frozen without a chance of shedding all the mess of design mistakes it should have thrown away. No, I'm not clamoring for types. I don't particularly appreciate static types "the Java way". Maybe "the Haskell way" -- not enough experience with that.
(Log in to post comments)
Reitter: Answering the question: "How do I develop an app for GNOME?" Posted Feb 6, 2013 23:49 UTC (Wed) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link]
> Maybe "the Haskell way" -- not enough experience with that.
Haskell can typically figure out what you want for types (type declarations on functions are typically "make sure I didn't screw up" or "don't generalize too much"[1]). Think of it of C++11's 'auto', but with the ability to use it pretty much everywhere if you want (argument types, template types, return values, etc.). And you wouldn't have to type 'auto'.
[1]I'm pretty sure that (length :: [a] -> Int) is usually optimized better than a (genericLength :: (Num b) => [a] -> b).
|
|||||||||||||