On: Writing web applications using only the Go Standar...

[ternaryoperator]

> Ohhhh the pain and torment (guessing, apathy, and crying about how horrible things like markup and JavaScript are because they simply aren't Java).

Almost everyone complains about JavaScript, and very few of the folks I hear complain about it wish it were more "like Java."

[libria → ternaryoperator]

Closure and Typescript added type checking/safety features, ES6 adds classes, Typescript even has generics and interfaces. Javascript developers will eventually add most of Java's features but keep their conscience clear by never uttering the phrase "like Java".

[iopq → libria]

Last I heard, Java didn't invent type checking.

[jdoliner → ternaryoperator]

I haven't heard anyone wishing it were more like Java although Google does have a Java to Javascript compiler that they use for some of their web applications. I'd guess those people in some way wish Javascript was more like Java or at least that they could write Java in places they'd otherwise be writing Javascript. It probably makes a lot more sense if your backend is also written in Java so you can share code between them.

[cblock811 → ternaryoperator]

I've never heard anyone say they wish JavaScript were more like Java. Can you tell me more about why they say that?

[c_shu → cblock811]

I wished I could have `for...of` loop to iterate array in javascript, so I can say goodbye to `for(var i=0;i<len;i++)`. Now it's supported by all browsers. But it's so late. You cannot use it unless you only support very recent browsers.

[ludamad → c_shu]

Not true, you can use typescript and have it along with stays-out-of-your-way static typing, or only test in modern browsers and cross compile later.

[c_shu → ludamad]

That's another language. You can prefer Java. You can prefer TypeScript. They are just not JavaScript. (Nowadays there are so many source-to-source compilers to JavaScript. Even Java-to-Javascript compiler.)

[ludamad → c_shu]

What additions that TypeScript has do you find offensive? And that's why I gave my second option, which allows you to use modern JavaScript natively (without the additional features TypeScript has, if so opposed) and cross-compile when you have to target older platforms.

[Tempest1981 → cblock811]

I heard it a while back, from people wanting classes in JavaScript.

[bbcbasic → Tempest1981]

Yeah people wish alien language is more like their home planet language, so there isn't a new mental model to learn.

[DCoder → bbcbasic]

Or, once they have learned the alien language, they see legitimate shortcomings in it that their native language doesn't have.

[bbcbasic → DCoder]

True but I guess many OOers don't care to try to think prototypically. I did and I conclude that OO and prototypes suck equally so might as well use the prototypes

[baby → ternaryoperator]

I've never heard anyone wishing something would be more like java.

[bbcbasic → baby]

Or JS for that matter.