On Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:30:26 -0700 "H. S. Teoh" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 08:19:06AM -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote: > > On Sun, 10 Mar 2013 14:32:42 +0400 > > Gor Gyolchanyan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Jonathan M Davis > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > The more I deal with this language, the more I love it, and the > > > > more frustrating it is to deal with other languages (much as I > > > > like many of them as well). D is the only language where I found I liked it *more* the more I used it. Everything else has been the other way around: The more I use them, the more I get frustrated with their downsides and limitations. > > [...] > > JavaScript: What other language you gonna use for client-side web? > [...] > > Coming from you, I find that rather funny, and a little > disturbing. ;-) > Heh :), well, regardless of my opinions of it though, the biggest reason for JS's (unfortunate) success is not anything inherent about the JS language itself, but simply because: for all the many people who want to do a bunch of DHTML and such, it's the only option. (And yea, Java applets and Flash were client-side, but those didn't actually enable DHTML, AFAIK. Only JS could do that.) > -- > He who laughs last thinks slowest. "Hee hee hee hee hee...I don't get it!" -- Scooby Doo
