> the differences between frontend and backend or the database or os kernel are minor to talented programmers.
nope > an era of browser as a platform will surely come:-) not sure what you mean, have a look at FirefoxOS Anyway, I'm done here, so probably should you On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 7:02 PM, eric <[email protected]> wrote: > > Programmers are always facing different environments or problems. > the differences between frontend and backend or the database or os kernel > are minor to talented programmers. > You are laugh at yourself. > > Abandoning dart doesn't mean that the way is wrong, maybe only the timing > is not proper. > > And finally is a netro language interface is not a plugin. > > an era of browser as a platform will surely come:-) > > > 在 15/5/27 01:43, Andrea Giammarchi 写道: > > > then veryone can be a full stack programmer > > I had a genuine laugh there ... it's like sayiing since JS runs on > server, micro-controllers, and IndexedDB is a thing, everyone now is a full > stack developer that could do server too. > > Please do not merge these two very different topics ... if you know > Python or C you won't move a single step forward on the Web and DOM. > Different environments, problems, worlds, different everything ... you > function validates an email? Good, how about everything else that could go > wrong or is simply different? > > Anyway, this is the development-toolchain era so if Google Dart is fine > abandoning an alternative engine for its own browser and simply trust > transpiling to JS, why wouldn't any other "different language" lover do the > same? > > It's also the era where everyone cannot wait for any sort of plugin to > die due any sort of related problem ( looking at you Silverlight DRM > streaming on Linux ) so regardless I agree there are cases where we'd like > to have pure/native "other language" running on the browser (e.g. see also > WebGL and GLES indirections) I don't think having the equivalent of LLVM > interfaces for any sort of PL would bring any real-world benefit to the Web > ... see, again and indeed, Emscripten to asm.js results > > Regards > > > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 6:18 PM, eric <[email protected]> wrote: > >> You are always misleading. >> >> what you've listed just show that the trend is real and urgent. >> >> but you choose to ignore it and mislead it. >> >> why asm.js ? because there is no support for c++/c from browsers. >> what if the browsers support c++/c navtively? >> >> by >> <script language="c" src="http://code.site.com/abc.o"; >> <http://code.site.com/abc.o>> >> </script> >> which will run faster than asm.js. >> do we need asm.js then? >> >> if browser natively support languages like c, c++, python, ruby. >> then veryone can be a full stack programmer, >> >> >> >> 在 15/5/27 00:35, Matthew Robb 写道: >> >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:22 PM, eric <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> C++ can be compiled to C too. >>> no one would say C is a neutral language interface. >>> >> >> I'm sorry to tell you but the overwhelming trend within browsers is not >> in favor of what you are proposing. C++ compiles to Javascript and is VERY >> fast in that form. >> See: http://emscripten.org and http://asmjs.org/ >> >> If you don't think it will "catch on" then you should try to get more >> informed on the subject. >> >> >> https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2015/05/07/bringing-asm-js-to-chakra-microsoft-edge/ >> >> Finally: http://alwaysbetonjs.com >> >> >> - Matthew Robb >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> >> > >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
