On 29/10/2007, Robert Sayre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Temper tantrums about the name. > (there's really nothing to negotiate, aiui)
I can understand wanting to change the name for the reason Steve Yegge mentions in "How to Ignore Marketing and Become Irrelevant in Two Easy Steps" - Both JavaScript and ECMAScript are horrible names. On the other hand they have a considerable mindshare and I think it would be more confusing if the name was changed to something entirely unknown. I don't buy the argument that ES4 shouldn't be named "ECMAScript 4" or "JavaScript 2" because it's too big a a change to it's predecessor however. ES4 has been developed specifically to be an update to ECMAScript 3/JavaScript 1.x. As long as ES4 doesn't throw away considerable parts of ES3 (which it doesn't) then I can't see how that point is valid. The size of the "new" language compared to the size of "old" language isn't important, what's important is the fact it's pretty much entirely additional features that were lacking in the predecessor or added orthogonal mechanisms that makes things possible in the engine that were not possible before. -- David "liorean" Andersson _______________________________________________ Es4-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
