2008/3/23 Lemonade Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > The proposed ECMAScript 4 standard contains very different paradigms to the > current JavaScript/ECMAScript standard. In my view, it is the equivalent of > the changes between C and C++ - it's designed largely to be a revolution > rather than a mere evolution of the current ECMAScript/JavaScript standard.
I agree that the language design currently known as "proposed ES4" is about as different from the language described by ES3 as C++ is from C, and should therefore have a separate name. I have taken this position publicly on prior posts to es4-discuss. Further, by separating these efforts into separately named language efforts, those who favor large statically typed languages and those who favor small dynamic languages can self select into distinct efforts. The separate existence of C++ probably helped preserve the smallness of C for many years. Likewise, Common Lisp probably helped protect the smallness of Scheme. Both battles were ultimately lost, but defending these languages from featuritis for a few more decades was nothing to sneeze at. > Therefore I would like to propose that ECMAScript 4 (aka JavaScript 2) has a > different name to minimise confusion and punctuate the difference between > two languages with fundamentally different design decisions and paradigms. > [...] > Has this previously been discussed or is the current name set in stone? Yes. I've only joined the process recently, but I've seen this argued about on the list and raised at the EcmaScript committee. From the tone of the discussions, I gather that these issues had already been argued about extensively with no hope of consensus. Everyone seems tired of the argument, and we each know where everyone stands, so I'm not sure there's much use in arguing further. -- Cheers, --MarkM _______________________________________________ Es4-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
