

Google is developing programming techniques to simplify Web development - sonic0002
http://pixelstech.net/article/index.php?id=1333102933

======
binarymax
_Russell said that Google engineers are also developing a proposal for the
next version of JavaScript to add class concept. Class is a core element of
object-oriented programming language, it is the basis of data and code reuse.
JavaScript does not support class, the programmer can only use function calls
to complete some of the features which is a waste of time to write the code
that is not conducive to reuse._

Other than not having a 'Class' keyword in javascript, this is mostly a
useless statement. The beauty of javascript lies in the balance between object
and functional style. The prototypical model with first class functions is
what makes javascript so powerful. I don't see the need to change it, and if
you get into a situation where you need easy access to object oriented style,
coffeescript is a fine choice.

~~~
mattmanser
After all the discussions about javascript here and anywhere javascript is
mentioned you must realise by now that a lot of people disagree with you.

I'm not even going to go into why, it's been said a million times. Let's just
agree that you've got an opinion that's not particularly compelling or common
to a lot of experienced programmers. Your 'beauty' is many other people's
bane. The very things you've picked out can cause such complexity and pain.

~~~
RyanMcGreal
If you really want to program classical inheritance into Javascript, there are
ways to do that today. Meanwhile, prototypal inheritance is already simple and
powerful - so simple, perhaps, that programmers trained in classical
inheritance tend to stumble on it.

~~~
judofyr
I agree that prototypal inheritance is simple and powerful; JavaScript's
version of it on the other hand… By introducing constructors you get this
weird mix between classical and prototypical which isn't elegant at all :(

------
rmurphey3
Much love for Alex Russell and for efforts to move the web forward as a
serious development platform, but this was among the more content-free stories
I've read in a long time. If you'd like to actually learn about "model-driven
views," the component system the article mentions, head over to
<http://code.google.com/p/mdv/>.

~~~
eternalban
Reminds me of JSP (yep, its been that long). The theory of 'eternal return' in
history certainly seems to hold true for software ...

------
doug1001
A quote from the OP: " _Russell said that Google engineers are also developing
a proposal for the next version of JavaScript to add class concept. Class is a
core element of object-oriented programming language, it is the basis of data
and code reuse. JavaScript does not support class, the programmer can only use
function calls to complete some of the features which is a waste of time to
write the code that is not conducive to reuse._ "

I wonder if this portion of the Proposal is based on a thoughtful critique of
javascript. Javascript's object-oriented paradigm, prototypal OOP, gives JS
dynamic, class-free objects, and some would say that's a good thing--perhaps a
great thing. In addition, the Prototypal paradigm was developed much later
than Class-based OOP--nearly two decades later, and the developers of the
former certainly knew of the latter, and learned from it. Given that, i wonder
if this part of the Proposal isn't recommending retrograde techniques rather
than improvements.

------
voidr
I sometimes bang my head against the wall when I see stuff like this coming
from Google, they should have higher standards.

The lack of class keyword in JavaScript is not the problem, if you want that
so badly, because you can't code in anything but classes then just write a
preprocessor for it, it would probably take a few hours or just use
CoffeeScript. Google is helping here though with source maps, but it's kind of
disappointing that they make statements like this along the way.

Don't want preprocessor? Use something like this:
<http://ejohn.org/blog/simple-javascript-inheritance/> Or this:
[https://github.com/shichuan/javascript-
patterns/blob/master/...](https://github.com/shichuan/javascript-
patterns/blob/master/code-reuse-patterns/klass.html)

There are a lot of problems not even related to JavaScript that are way worse
than the lack of the class macro, just look at CSS.

The main thing I see here is that Google has a lot of Java people that are
reluctant to learn anything besides Java constructs and they want to make web
programming accessible to them so they can zerg rush development, GWT pretty
much proves this, but the funny thing is that I think they didn't use GWT in
G+ because it sucked.

Google should learn from Facebook, Facebook's front end JavaScript is mostly
"hand coded" and not generated from another language.

------
mattbriggs
The only problem with current OO in JavaScript is that it is different then
what most people know, and they don't like learning new things.

------
crjn
When did a programming language became the core of solving scalability
problems?

------
wazzupflow
Does "creating a generic component model" remind anyone else of portlets?

------
ankurdhama
"Next version of JavaScript to add class concept" = Lets make JavaScript sucks
like Java/C#/<other class based> programming languages works. OOP is anyway a
pathetic way to program and the "Class" based OOP is much more worse.

~~~
manuletroll
Nice trolling you did here. Though I wouldn't like JS becoming more Java-
like.. Or Dart-like for that matter.

~~~
ankurdhama
Thats what I said, we don't want Javascript to be Java like

------
mjwalshe
Really poor story you don't have to do OO to do code reuse. At my fist job
"hem hem " years ago we reused NAG algorithm libraries in FORTRAN IV.

When you relise the fact that you use the most apropriate tool for the job is
when you start to become a professional programmer.

~~~
djKianoosh
"use the most apropriate tool for the job" is a hard place to get to, as it
requires a combination of experience and critical thinking.

If they want to make something to make new programmers write better programs,
by all means!

~~~
mjwalshe
just inventing yet more OO languages is not going to help less fetizizing of
CS theory and more real world experience might be a better idea.

------
rsanchez1
The only thing needed to simplify web development is to have all browsers do
the same thing with the same code. It's why jQuery has been so popular. Write
code in jQuery and you have reasonable assurances that it will do the same in
any (modern) browser.

Besides, if Google is developing programming techniques to simplify web
development, then what the heck was Dart all about?

