Unfortunately JavaScript has got broad acceptance for the browser. I wish charismatic insightful leaders like Ken Iverson had had more influence... hopefully the solutions developed with the Iversonian philosophy will prevail as being just better, and they'll get that acceptance through merit in this weird democratic, consensus, panel approach that seems to prevail.
Amusingly, (evil laugh) the different JavaScript frameworks (to paint with broad brushstrokes) tend to try to make JavaScript look more like something else. The two main frameworks that I've looked at are the .Net version (let's make javascript look object oriented), and the jQuery, which mostly does a number of user interface (UI) things from what I can see. The libraries/frameworks (tongue in cheek), attempt to patch the frailties of different browsers javascript implementations so that the web developer can write code once. For the most part I feel the UI is the best place for javascript since it's reasonably multiplatform in a very commodity viewer thing called a browser. I've seen a "cascade" programming style used quite succinctly for fonts etc... the trouble comes when UI people reach for something more powerful... and invent server-side javascript. Scary. So to crudely describe two main language features: 1. closures are a trick to implement public/private variables/methods, and 2. prototypes kind of mean a list of linked objects. If you go to use a method/property in an object at the head of the list and it isn't there, the language automatically searches all other objects in the list before failing. Inefficient. This mechanism is used to implement inheritance + other ways of mashing objects together (duck typing, etc). It gets ugly before it gets better again. Privately, I guess big companies have embraced JavaScript as a means to an end, and praise it publicly. It's public relations. When I learned JavaScript, I went in not liking it, and I came out not liking it, yet appreciating it and being surprised to find it quite capable. Just to set the record straight, I love J/K/Q... I was forced to learn JavaScript (part of a certification), and came away thinking I'd use it again. -Steven On 2 September 2010 05:00, <[email protected]> wrote: > Send Beta mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://jsoftware.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/beta > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Beta digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: JS and Ajax help (Steven Taylor) > 2. Re: JS and Ajax help (Bj?rn Helgason) > 3. Re: JS and Ajax help (Ian Clark) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 07:23:12 +0100 > From: Steven Taylor <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Jbeta] JS and Ajax help > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: > > <[email protected]<j%[email protected]> > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Hey... I'm not sure how far into JavaScript you are, but I found this book > to be really useful in the past: > > JavaScript: The Good Parts > Unearthing the Excellence in JavaScript > By Douglas Crockford > > It's a reasonably concise, to the point book of 100 pages or so that covers > the main constructs. There are some subtlies about closures and protypal > inheritance that are worth getting your head around. I was surprised about > how much could be done with the language once you get around its > difficulties. Also surprising is that JavaScript draws inspiration from > Lisp > and Scheme. > > -Steven > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 10:02:29 +0000 > From: Bj?rn Helgason <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Jbeta] JS and Ajax help > To: Beta forum <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > A quote from the book: > "It is rarely possible for standard committees to remove imperfections from > a language because doing so would cause the breakage of all of the bad > programs that depend on those bad parts. They are usually powerless to do > anything except heap more features on top of existing pile of > imperfections. > And the new features do not always interact harmoniously, thus producing > more bad parts." > > > http://books.google.is/books?id=PXa2bby0oQ0C&printsec=frontcover&dq=JavaScript:+The+Good+Parts&source=bl&ots=HHtko4s-lK&sig=gUSv3lZUqxSTKF9s4cxsg706z5M&hl=is&ei=LCB-TJaYJsOn4Ab8wvXbBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDAQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false > > 2010/9/1 Steven Taylor <[email protected]> > > > Hey... I'm not sure how far into JavaScript you are, but I found this > book > > to be really useful in the past: > > > > JavaScript: The Good Parts > > Unearthing the Excellence in JavaScript > > By Douglas Crockford > > > > It's a reasonably concise, to the point book of 100 pages or so that > covers > > the main constructs. There are some subtlies about closures and protypal > > inheritance that are worth getting your head around. I was surprised > about > > how much could be done with the language once you get around its > > difficulties. Also surprising is that JavaScript draws inspiration from > > Lisp > > and Scheme. > > > > -Steven > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > > > > > -- > Bj?rn Helgason, Verkfr??ingur > Fornustekkum II > 781 Hornafir?i, > t-p?st: [email protected] > gsm: +3546985532 > s?mi: +3544781286 > http://groups.google.com/group/J-Programming > > > T?knikunn?tta h?ndlar hi? fl?kna, sk?punarg?fa er meistari einfaldleikans > > g??ur kennari getur stigi? ? t?r ?n ?ess a? glansinn fari af sk?num > /|_ .-----------------------------------. > ,' .\ / | Me? l?ttri lund ver?ur | > ,--' _,' | Dagurinn ? dag | > / / | Enn betri en g?rdagurinn | > ( -. | `-----------------------------------' > | ) | (\_ _/) > (`-. '--.) (='.'=) ?????? > `. )----' (")_(") ?? > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2010 23:01:28 +0100 > From: Ian Clark <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Jbeta] JS and Ajax help > To: Beta forum <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Love it! > > "Let's start with C and stick bits on as they occur to us" -- > Javascript is an object-lesson that designing a language isn't quite > so easy as it looks. > > BTW: Googling "kludge definition" ... I cannot see my favourite > definition, from way back: > > "KLUDGE: an ill-assortment of parts forming a distressing whole." > > > > 2010/9/1 Bj?rn Helgason <[email protected]>: > > A quote from the book: > > "It is rarely possible for standard committees to remove imperfections > from > > a language because doing so would cause the breakage of all of the bad > > programs that depend on those bad parts. They are usually powerless to do > > anything except heap more features on top of existing pile of > imperfections. > > And the new features do not always interact harmoniously, thus producing > > more bad parts." > > > > > http://books.google.is/books?id=PXa2bby0oQ0C&printsec=frontcover&dq=JavaScript:+The+Good+Parts&source=bl&ots=HHtko4s-lK&sig=gUSv3lZUqxSTKF9s4cxsg706z5M&hl=is&ei=LCB-TJaYJsOn4Ab8wvXbBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CDAQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false > > > > 2010/9/1 Steven Taylor <[email protected]> > > > >> Hey... I'm not sure how far into JavaScript you are, but I found this > book > >> to be really useful in the past: > >> > >> JavaScript: The Good Parts > >> Unearthing the Excellence in JavaScript > >> By Douglas Crockford > >> > >> It's a reasonably concise, to the point book of 100 pages or so that > covers > >> the main constructs. There are some subtlies about closures and protypal > >> inheritance that are worth getting your head around. I was surprised > about > >> how much could be done with the language once you get around its > >> difficulties. Also surprising is that JavaScript draws inspiration from > >> Lisp > >> and Scheme. > >> > >> -Steven > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Bj?rn Helgason, Verkfr??ingur > > Fornustekkum II > > 781 Hornafir?i, > > t-p?st: [email protected] > > gsm: +3546985532 > > s?mi: +3544781286 > > http://groups.google.com/group/J-Programming > > > > > > T?knikunn?tta h?ndlar hi? fl?kna, sk?punarg?fa er meistari einfaldleikans > > > > g??ur kennari getur stigi? ? t?r ?n ?ess a? glansinn fari af sk?num > > ? ? ? ? ?/|_ ? ? ?.-----------------------------------. > > ? ? ? ? ,' ?.\ ?/ ?| Me? l?ttri lund ver?ur ? ? ? ?| > > ? ? ,--' ? ?_,' ? | Dagurinn ? dag ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | > > ? ?/ ? ? ? / ? ? ? | Enn betri en g?rdagurinn ?| > > ? ( ? -. ?| ? ? ? ?`-----------------------------------' > > ? | ? ? ) | ? ? ? ? (\_ _/) > > ?(`-. ?'--.) ? ? ? (='.'=) ? ?????? > > ? `. )----' ? ? ? ?(")_(") ?? > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > > ------------------------------ > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > > End of Beta Digest, Vol 49, Issue 2 > *********************************** > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
