The point I take away from this that I don't see many other people commenting on is that while Douglas is specifically talking about JavaScript, I see this as a metaphor/opinion that can be applied to the entire development industry. Companies advertise and hire for technologies because the technology has market share, not because it fits into their application stack.

@gabrielpauna62

Жыл бұрын

Yeah but they are also ubiquitous, adoption is important for hiring and maintenance

@laughingvampire7555

Жыл бұрын

@@gabrielpauna62 and that is why we have all these problems, because all is patched by throwing money at it, not engineering.

@lemurdinner

Жыл бұрын

​@@laughingvampire7555 that, and the fact that open source became so political it's not even about writing good software anymore

@smallbluemachine

11 ай бұрын

That’s a great point, to use the right tech for the problem. Also he appeals to us to stop using it generally. 🫠

@asagiai4965

11 ай бұрын

that's problem the person can be either talking about JavaScript (original) or Javascript (development industry). JavaScript (original) is not just a market share, not just application stack. It is main our basis for the web.

I will keep using Javascript as long it pays my bills

@alishapayne4121

Жыл бұрын

lol agreed

@lka.02

Жыл бұрын

😂

@okseaj

Жыл бұрын

this is why I propose a JavaScript tax

@yourix2

Жыл бұрын

Amen to that brother😂

@sparkhum

Жыл бұрын

😂😂

"We're just stuck with this crap, and they keep piling on new features on everything and the new features always create new problems, and it doesn't have to be like that." This guy definitely is aware. This is the current state of software development in a nutshell. It's a nightmare.

@kasperkat2004

11 ай бұрын

The syntax of js is garbage and that is why MS developed typescript as a work around this garbage.

@UnlikelyToRemember

11 ай бұрын

I love programming in javascript (occasional syntax sins excepted), but then I avoid using what I find to be the "smelly" bits. Maybe the answer is just to come up with some rough consensus on what the smelly bits are and deprecate them (although please not via "use fragrant") ;) Then we can keep using javascript rather tan starting completely from scratch.

@SiisKolkytEuroo

10 ай бұрын

@@kasperkat2004 if that were true, then why did typescript keep literally all of javascript's syntax, ie. make it a superset of javascript instead of inventing new syntax That is a rhetorical question of course

@horridohobbies

10 ай бұрын

@@kasperkat2004 Unfortunately, TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript which means many web developers will STILL be writing JS code.

@horridohobbies

10 ай бұрын

@@UnlikelyToRemember Unfortunately, tons of JS code need to be maintained and you cannot replace all the smelly bits during your maintenance. You're stuck with the crap forever.

“There are still people developing languages but nobody cares. One person can make a programming language, a really good one, but you can’t get adoption for it.” He made a good point and he is absolutely right.

@Asma.Mirgoul

11 ай бұрын

Abdolutely????

@berkaybakacak

11 ай бұрын

@@Asma.Mirgoul düzeltme için teşekkürler kanka :) yazarken yanlış tuşa basmışım

@ricardoamendoeira3800

11 ай бұрын

I was actually confused by that statement, there are quite a few recent languages growing in adoption: Kotlin, Rust, Swift and Go being the main ones but also smaller ones like Julia, Zig and Nim.

@RottenMuLoT

11 ай бұрын

Because a language is NOT a framework. The academic vs the "discrete" worlds are very different for inherently good reasons.

@berkaybakacak

11 ай бұрын

@@ricardoamendoeira3800 In my opinion, Douglas is referring to languages like Mojo, Vlang, and other lesser-known languages that are fantastic but not widely known among most people. There are even languages that allow programming with commands in the native languages of different countries, but those countries are not even aware of these languages.

He also wrote "JavaScript: The Good Parts", the most popular javascript book. I agree with him 100% about the state of javascript/typescript.

@thr417

11 ай бұрын

Can you explain what he meant by there is something wrong with the web dev and js

@sgwaic

11 ай бұрын

​@@thr417 if youve used js you should know, the language itself was supposed to be a cool new tool to add interactivity to websites and it had a lot of weird functionality that carried over due to to maintaining backwards compatability. its just a big mess and people made ts to try and mitigate the fact it cant check for type errors but its not even good at that either as it still lets janky code with "any" types and its just more hacky code on top of hacky code. it really is time for a new and clean modern web dev language

@grimpowsify

11 ай бұрын

@@sgwaic the fact 'any' exist dont mean you have to use it heavily, like in C# you could use 'object' ... isnt beause there is weird way to do thing that you have to do it weird too ...

@lukeet331

11 ай бұрын

​@@sgwaic I would argue every single layer of tech infrastructure we have is hacky shit layered on or interwoven someone else's hacky shit. That's just the nature of development and internet technology as a whole you'll never fix it...

@rea9lizer

11 ай бұрын

​@some guy with an internet connection I agree that TS is not good enough but please stop saying TS is bad because of 'any'. Most of the sane devs shouldn't and don't use it.

I've been saying this for years about the web languages in general. HTML and CSS are languages that, though they've been modified to support applications, were designed to describe documents. The application tags and styles were added in with mixed results, but HTML and CSS are STILL languages for describing documents. And JavaScript was invented to support that model. We can obviously create large and complex applications using HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. I'm a professional full-stack engineer, and do this every day. But it WOULD be nice to have modern languages that the browsers understand natively, without transpilers, that were designed from ground up to be for creating applications, not documents with application code thrown on top.

@MrHeulendoch

11 ай бұрын

Wasm?

@jamienordmeyer4345

11 ай бұрын

@@MrHeulendoch Wasm would be fine for the compiled language that the browser uses for sure, but I'm talking about writing, as a developer, in something other than HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. I'm not a huge fan of Microsoft's XAML language personally (I HATE the whole INotifyPropertyChanged thing), but like the general concept of it, including the way it handles styles. So I'm thinking something roughly akin to that. Then for a programming language that compiles to WASM, maybe something like Rust? Or a version of TypeScript that doesn't need to cater to transpiling to JavaScript. Don't know, haven't spent a ton of time thinking about it.

@protonneutron9046

10 ай бұрын

If the market demands it, it will happen. Otherwise, no

@jamienordmeyer4345

10 ай бұрын

@@protonneutron9046 Oh, for sure. And I don't see the market demanding it. What we have now DOES work. It's just not ideal in my humble opinion. But it does work. Fortunately, we have tools and frameworks now that can make it easier, and CSS HAS been extended with things like FlexBox and Grid that help with positioning.

@aethrya

10 ай бұрын

Thoughts on htmx?

I think it’s because when all these new languages were coming out in the 90’s, companies were just still starting to integrate computers and the internet to their business, so they had the flexibility to move to new and better languages when a better one came out. But now, many companies entire digital foundation is built off of one tech stack for 10+ years, and these are massive companies. Imagine all the work of re-training their employees to this new stack, converting their whole code base to this new language. There’s a plethora of things that could go wrong. That’s why it’s hard for PHP to die. It’s hard to blame them really

@jamesyoo67

11 ай бұрын

@@jonasjonaitis8571 Ugh PHP are you serious? No offense but I had to work with it for two years and it was pretty painful, for my team at least.

@kurtsaidwhat

10 ай бұрын

Exactly. Most the world has been built on old tools. One does not simply make new tools and make a new world.

@johannestafelmaier616

10 ай бұрын

One word, legacy. The antagonist of innovation.

@ohwow2074

10 ай бұрын

I like PHP. I got to know it recently. Pretty funny. Yet powerful.

@bonbonbonbons

10 ай бұрын

​​@@jamesyoo67 Well PHP has changed a bit. Don't tell me you've worked for PHP before 2022 because PHP today is much more different than the PHP years ago (see Laravel). Same with Java years ago and Java now. Languages change, you know.

Finally, an authorative professional who say an obvious thing: javascript is *unamendable*. It cannot be fixed. It must be replaced.

@timty2828

14 күн бұрын

What better alternative was he talking about or do you suggest?

@leagueofrebellio1224

13 күн бұрын

​@@timty2828Chinese language

JSON not allowing a trailing comma was the biggest mistake.

@AllanTheBanjo

Жыл бұрын

Json existing is the biggest mistake...

@fernandoluna5458

Жыл бұрын

​@@AllanTheBanjo why?

@AllanTheBanjo

Жыл бұрын

@@fernandoluna5458 YAML is a better choice for config, more concise, more expressive, with more data types, less prone to bad syntax with a missing (or extraneous) comma. I For machine machine JSON is just wrong. My client requires JSON on my current project so I have to maintain encode / decode in C++ on the edge and with JS on the cloud. Any change in the structure requires a heap of work. If we were using Google's protocol buffers or ASN.1 for example, the code would all be generated automatically from a clearly defined schema. I'd have a type-safe class to represent the data structure (with support for optional items, debug output etc).

@fernandoluna5458

Жыл бұрын

@@AllanTheBanjo Really appreciate your resoning. Thank you!

@tecTitus

11 ай бұрын

@@AllanTheBanjo Json is just fine in languages with reflection to automate serialization/deserialization. Use ngenned C# on the edge to stop pulling your hair

I took my first JavaScript course in 2000. The teacher said he could see the day when JavaScript would become a dead language. Now, it is more entrenched in web development than ever, and it doesn't look like it's going away any time soon.

@sixstanger00

11 ай бұрын

I also first got exposed to JS in college in 2001. While I do think there are some aspects that are "messy," I don't think it's nearly as "smelly" as people suggest. It's honestly no more "messy" than Java, or really any other OOP that uses for loops, if-then-else statements, arrays, etc. What's given JS a bad name is the endless variety of libraries that have started coming out every few months or so. It's cut deep into actual productive coding because devs are constantly being asked to refactor code to utilize the newest version of React, Redux, etc. It's maddening. I'm a firm believer in Vanilla JS. Any time saved by relying on libraries is going to be lost when something goes wrong and now you've got to sift through chunks of code you didn't even write. I few months ago I started a course on React (because it's the latest and greatest, right?). I remember reading the introduction to React and it describing how React lets you output HTML to the DOM interactively. My immediate thought was, "Uhh....but.....can't I already do that? Can't I just write HTML as a string var, and then use innerHTML or insertAdjacentHTML to modify the DOM? And I don't need all this unnecessary React nonsense?"

@vladimirputindreadlockrast812

11 ай бұрын

@@sixstanger00 Couldn't have said it better myself. I took a job with a writer's community, and the owner said I needed to embrace jQuery, which I did. I told him that jQuery didn't do anything you can't already do in vanilla JS, and he didn't want to hear about it. I think it's nonsense to have to switch from React to Vue to Angular. Just pick one and run with it.

@yumyum7196

11 ай бұрын

@@sixstanger00 I agree with the overreliance on libraries. As far as inserting HTML directly, I think the difference is that React is running an SPA ... unless you wanted to implement that yourself.

@badass6300

11 ай бұрын

That's the problem

@yavarjn2055

11 ай бұрын

JS was made when we had horrible internet and became the standard for the web. Since then little had changed. It is a dinasaur walking in modern times.

I totally understand his sentiment. If we were to gather the best stakeholders in the language/browser space, lock 'em in a room with the brief to create the next gen of DOM and a scripting language to manipulate it, I'm 100% certain that the result would solve all of the DOM and Javascript's shortcomings, be more capable, be faster, more robust and usable. It makes me wonder why there isn't already such a project.

@calimio6

11 ай бұрын

There are features that after years have not shipped and bugs with decades just because the different parts could not agree on them. Google does what they like and so does the rest. That's also the main difference with JavaScript vs other languages there is no single party behind it. What ecma says is only valid if the vendors implement it.

@stephenoshaughnessy2279

11 ай бұрын

I'd be in favor of those programmers redefining a slimmed down version of JavaScript that follows good programming concepts. Create a structured language template for JavaScript that was taught in C and C++.

@Martinit0

11 ай бұрын

@@calimio6 How is that going to change with a new language? It's always going to be a power struggle. That's not a technical problem.

@calimio6

11 ай бұрын

@@Martinit0 and what did I say?

@Jaime-eg4eb

11 ай бұрын

Because JavaScript already is that. With some back-compatibility issues that are easy to ignore.

as a web developer, the only concern for us back then when it comes to javascript was browser compatibility, which jQuery has solved, now all these new frameworks etc. instead of making it simple, it just getting way way more complicated.

@GeneraluStelaru

11 ай бұрын

Modern requirements are too much for jQuery alone.

@RyanRouleau

11 ай бұрын

Try building any modern day frontend with just jquery and see how it goes. We need more complex frameworks and libraries to support more complex applications

@jongskie777

11 ай бұрын

@@RyanRouleau its doable, but its x3 the effort. But very doable.

@justanaveragebalkan

11 ай бұрын

​@@RyanRouleau Can you tell me where's the common ground between react and jQuery please, might have missed something in the past 10 years but i am pretty sure they have absolutely nothing in common. Also React is the bane of all evil, yes it basically a standard, but it's also proven that we need code academies to teach people basic syntax these days, so i wouldn't compare anything modern to being close to better then X from before. If you want to compare vanilla javascript and react you would most likely point to web components than Jquery, bot fit the same requirements, problem is web components take much more effort to achieve the same thing. The biggest issue however, is that people are taking it too far, the web was created as a medium to share information not to build software on top of it, and nowadays people want to build desktop applications on top of the web which is frankly stupid and 9/10 a complete flop.

@pdcmoreira

11 ай бұрын

@@justanaveragebalkan How is it "stupid" and "a complete flop" when web apps are extremely successful and their advantages are obvious?

I absolutely love JavaScript, and I agree with everything Crockford says in this short video. It seems that a lot of the commenters here think that the problems with JavaScript can be solved by taking features AWAY from it, and let it resemble older languages like C more. But he clearly states that we need a new generation of programming languages - he talks about how development of new languages kind of stopped with Java and JavaScript. He doesn't mention C#, PHP, Python, Ruby etc. but they are all from about 25 years ago, and it does indeed seem that we are stuck - and that is a bad thing! The problem isn't whether you have one, two, or three equalsigns, or whether you need to define your datatypes yourself or let the compiler figure it out - the problem is that our entire model of what programming should be, is still stuck in the 1990s ...

1:15 "There are terrible mistakes in the way the web works , in the way our operating systems work..." As a graybeard whose favorite language is COBOL, I agree with him 100%. It sounds stupid, but I absolutely guarantee the internet was not supposed to end up the way it has. It is just what happens when folks focus on short term profit and clicks (attention) instead of actually doing something productive long term.

@kasperkat2004

11 ай бұрын

I agree. There is too much and not enough tested quality.

@StudiousCattery

11 ай бұрын

I'm not disagreeing, but what would the internet have looked like if not driven by profit?

@jytou

11 ай бұрын

@@StudiousCattery I think it's all about percentages. Out there, we totally see the positive ways the Internet can be used: it enhances communication around the world in fantastic ways, brings all information at our fingertips in seconds, empowers people with decentralized systems, and so much more. However, when you look at the numbers, an overwhelming majority of its use is pure brain-melting entertainment (think TikTok as the primary example). Overall, instead of pulling us up, it's globally pulling us down collectively, just because, as the OP mentioned, it is primarily driven by profit - which has quite different incentives and goals than the public good. :)

@FLMKane

11 ай бұрын

​@@StudiousCatteryhe's not criticising profit he's criticizing stupidity and goldfish memories. I guarantee that the short term profit chasing decisions made in the 2000s have caused long term reductions in profit. Look at the history of Internet Explorer for a good example

@Universal7135

26 күн бұрын

@@jytou That's true, but how would a different tech stack change that? Profit maximization is just a built-in feature of capitalism (not an anti-capitalist btw, just stating a fact).

This man is golden, selfless, humble enough to tell you to look beyong them. I have always had the dream to be mentored by people like this. Sir, your words are golden and perfect for the next generation to learn from.

We don't need to get rid of JavaScript. The problem is that too many developers got rid of structured programming concepts. Instead, the language has been contorted into endless pretzels of programmer predilections. It has devolved into a chaos of permutated "options". That needs to be cleaned up before you think of starting a new language.

It didn't stop. TypeScript, Rust, Kotlin, Swift, etc. Most devs don't touch the smelly parts of JS anymore. They use TS (+transpiler/bundler). But it's not about the language, it's about the browser embedding support and they aren't doing that. Edit: Yes WASM, but see my reply (TLDR: it needs tighter integration with control over DOM etc. not interfacing with JS)

@mickmister

Жыл бұрын

new Date()

@antdx316

Жыл бұрын

Just have the ability to use new languages as an embed.

@asiacuisine4869

Жыл бұрын

Typescript is basically Javescript. Lolll

@EricMuyser

Жыл бұрын

@@asiacuisine4869 Except that it isn't, in the sense that it's an evolution that protects you from a lot of the cruft in JS, like the "weird type comparisons" we all know. Further, the world of TS+WebPack is a far cry away from raw JS.

@asiacuisine4869

Жыл бұрын

​@@EricMuyser It is the same ecosystem, runtime.

Well I've been doing web development for a while now and one thing that I came to understand is that there is no perfect technology, there are instead "tradeoffs"

@ChristopherCricketWallace

Жыл бұрын

JavaScript IS the tradeoff 😂. it's awful. Typescript is proof.

@hmacccc

Жыл бұрын

"There are no solutions. There are only trade-offs" - Thomas Sowell

@YuriG03042

Жыл бұрын

there are only 2 types of languages: the ones that everyone hates and the ones that no one uses

@turolretar

11 ай бұрын

But those trade offs are not equal, that’s the point, there’s definitely something better than javascript for web. What’s scary is that it’s definitely not the first or the hundredths time someone thought about this and it’s still js all around.

@docesam

Ай бұрын

@@turolretar exactly.

It all boils down to financial incentive. As long as executives can get working apps at a low enough development and production cost, then it doesn't matter to them that much. People create great languages but in the beginning, it is pointless for developers to learn as there are no job opportunities and very few ressources to learn from and get solutions to eventual issues. As for companies, they won't add it to their stack because of the hardship of getting developers that are proficient in that new language and it creates a vicious circle that keeps that language into oblivion. Unless there is backing from a popular company or you get enough developers really excited about it, it won't take off. JavaScript is now ubiquitous and with such a huge ecosystem, people will need a really strong reason to move away from it.

@theadityadeshpande

11 ай бұрын

Agree 100%

@user-hz1yc6cw6k

11 ай бұрын

Executives don't choose technologies, it's developers who takes Angular and React for new projects

@tjkatz

26 күн бұрын

There are plenty of reasons at scale. Switching from a full NodeJS back end to something like Go can result in you saving 90% or more on infra costs.

At end of the day, it depends on how we use it. If we want static type we can typescript it. If we want functional programming we can write in functional way. If we want no-exceptions pattern like Golang we can add lint to block the build Maybe I’m missing something but what things materially make it bad?

@princehamza890

2 ай бұрын

your codebase is always huge mess with JS because it is imperative compare that to elegant declarative language like Haskell

Browsers became so powerful that we develop web apps, desktop apps, mobile apps and frameworks with JavaScript (TypeScript). I wish there was a way but I just don't see how we can replace JavaScript yet.

@TechBuddy_

Жыл бұрын

True Wasm is sooo close yet soo far

@rhatalos1997

Жыл бұрын

@@TechBuddy_ Yeah, maybe we need a few more years and then we can slowly get rid of JavaScript

@PabloSebastianVelazco

Жыл бұрын

maui?

@Robula

Жыл бұрын

Currently writing hybrid apps using html CSS and C#. No JavaScript ❤

@RM-ep2dc

Жыл бұрын

@@TechBuddy_ WASM is unfortunately becoming a monster, with extension (wasi) after extension (component model) and incompatibility (wasi again). It will always be soo close yet so far.

I love this type of controversial content

@davidross1560

Жыл бұрын

Agreed, although I wish it was longer. 2 mins is way too short.

@BenTilford

Жыл бұрын

Douglas Crockford loves telling people what they shouldn't do

@Daijyobanai

Жыл бұрын

you mean clickbait content?

Well, none of the older languages have really been phased out in reality. Banks are still using Cobol and Mainframes, around 90% of the cellphones use Java, and pretty much any kind of hardware uses a flavor of C to do the low level stuff. The real question is why JS has remained so popular for so long?

@Toulkun

11 ай бұрын

Because people use internet daily and websites are all on JS and its frameworks-libraries

@emmakun

11 ай бұрын

@@Toulkun yeah, but that doesn’t explain JS popularity because most of the people using internet and websites everyday doesn’t even know how to code, so they couldn’t care less what programming language the internet is using the most.

@Deb_deCoder

Ай бұрын

​@@emmakun the reason is people use browser the most among all softwares, google chrome is the most used browser, chrome browser's V8 engine can only understand JavaScript.. that's why JS is so much popular

I think it will happen but its important to understand that they kind of people who make these types of decisions will always be influenced by their bottom line. If their clients need a product and their engineers are experienced in js what incentive do they have to innovate?

Doug was there when E (the language which inspired JavaScript's promise implementation) was created, and honestly, the web should steal the rest of E - especially the capability model that enables secure interaction with the UI. The existing DOM is broken beyond repair: if you grant any component the ability to render nodes, you also grant the ability to load JavaScript with the global window in scope, and it inherits the ambient authority that comes from the SOP.

I really enjoy hearing from Doug, I remember seeing his history of JavaScript/programming a number of years ago that were really eye opening

@AdminAntitask

Жыл бұрын

same here, I learned a lot from Doug back in the days...

@smoothbeak

Жыл бұрын

@@AdminAntitask :) I remember a while back a lot of people got mad at him for something

@JasonLatouche

11 ай бұрын

I'd love to see this. Do you know where I can find it?

I wouldve loved if he actually mentioned specifics such as as drawbacks of JavaScript and what makes it smelly and what he would expect from its replacement or his imagination of what the new evolution of web could be if JavaScript was to be dumped? His reasoning is totally understandable but vague and can be applied on a lot of things at least based on this video or snippet if its a part of a larger one!

@prodevus

11 ай бұрын

Javascript is a dumpster fire

@brianmorgan5880

11 ай бұрын

@@rice83101 I'm the graybeard here. I lived through the "Fortran...C...C++" evolution, and let's not forget Assembly language in the early days because the processors were too darned slow. Javascript was, and still is, a godsend in my opinion. You mentioned '===' and '=='. I guess it had to do with all those years writing Assembly, but I look at '===' as a fast-running '==' since there is no type-checking or coercing. I use it when I KNOW that I'm comparing two things of the same type. If I don't know, then I use '=='.

@Ihsannurulimansfd

11 ай бұрын

This keyword, closure, prototype, shallow copy object, equality comparison, var keyword, no data type, JavaScript being a dynamic language, very ugly way to handle inheritance, no access modifier, the way it handles asynchronous tasks that often give unexpected output, ... That's the drawbacks of JS that's came out of my mind while typing this, and there are so much more.

@rohanmudumba2545

11 ай бұрын

@@Ihsannurulimansfdthese are all learned things though. A fault of a language should not be it’s learning curve, but ability to implement new features fast.

@JLRishe

11 ай бұрын

​@@rice83101 Most people are writing in another language and compiling to JS? I don't think that's true. Do you have a source for that claim? There are tons of people writing ordinary JavaScript and it is a fine language if you know how to use it well.

I totally agreed. Where I can find the full interview?? please 🥺

Once things get well adopted and shown to work, the reason to change has to be compelling. None of the new languages provide a compelling enough reason to change. Go is great (for example), so is Rust ... but CPU is not the bottleneck for 90% of developers (and if it was, scaling is cheap), so there is no incentive to change from well supported tools. Javascript is essentially SQL now, it isn't going anywhere for the same reasons SQL isn't going anywhere. We should have better clothes too ... but everyone still wears jeans. :)

@zhamed9587

11 ай бұрын

golang is not a good language

@tetrabromobisphenol

11 ай бұрын

The crappy performance of most web applications is absolutely a compelling reason to change languages going forward. Rust doesn't just solve CPU usage issues, it just makes everything about a program or application far more reliable. No language is perfect and solve everything, but Rust definitely makes for applications that are intrinsically far more dependable than anything Javascript can produce.

@stevenharder308

11 ай бұрын

@@tetrabromobisphenol”intrinsically” dependable? 🙄

@salamander1782

11 ай бұрын

Yeah but JS is jeans with holes in it, exposing your junk

@TravelTom2

11 ай бұрын

@@zhamed9587 Why? Its developed by one of best engineers....

For a moment WebAssembly looked to be set to replace Javascript, but it requires a load of glue and boilerplate to bootstrap, tying it back into JS. The tooling around it is a mess. Coupled with the extra cost in terms of binary size and start-up latency compared to JS, we're stuck with JS since it provides that instant responsiveness people want from the web. You can't escape it. Still, developing a JS replacement is a worthwhile endeavour, but I don't envy the people tasked with it. The web is probably the largest single attack surface in Tech, security in any new language has to be a priority. And web browsers are some of the most labyrinthian code projects out there, with some of the most obscure and opaque management structures to boot. Getting anything new added and standardised requires wrangling at least three multinationals and who knows how many committees and working groups. It takes at minimum months to sometimes years for anything to happen. (How long has WebGPU been in development now?) It is apt that Douglas should mention generations. The Web tech-space is trapped between two generations. Development of browsers and their supporting technologies is more akin to the days of Waterfall design practices, while all the companies leveraging JS for the next big thing are all about Agile methods. One wouldn't be surprised if that creates a bit of a language barrier.

@PeterBernardin

11 ай бұрын

When WASM will be able to directly access the DOM, without having to use JS as a middle-man, that will be a big day.

@hbp_

11 ай бұрын

​@@PeterBernardin or if there was no DOM there would be less to standardize and the browser would be simpler. Why don't we just let web frameworks draw whatever. The document model is dead.

@PeterBernardin

11 ай бұрын

@@hbp_ You can already do that with stuff like Offscreen canvas and webgl and wasm. I think that's how flutter works. Along those lines at least. The issue is you have to ship an entire rendering pipeline with the app. Huge bundle. Also no standard for SEO.

@Originalimoc

11 ай бұрын

Wait isn't wasm start-up faster?

@hbp_

11 ай бұрын

@@PeterBernardin will it be much bigger tho. The quick solution to SEO could be to serve the text contents either just for the robots or in some hidden part. How did they solve this with Flash based websites?

I think this is interesting, because on one hand I do agree with him. On the other hand to make a counter point during those earlier days software/computers hadn't hit the critical mass that they had today, and as others have said the benefits we get are... less drastic. Like I do think we could create a better developer experience, but there are enough people unwilling to try a new language and a lack of interest in supporting said languages.

They're working on it, Mr. Crockford, and it's much improved since 2015 - especially with TypeScript (and I hear native typing is on the horizon).

@troooooper100

Ай бұрын

Typescript 🤮

@magnanova

14 күн бұрын

Typescript is better than JS but it's just a bandaid. A new language with native typing is where it needs to go.

well.. he does have a point

@liftingisfun2350

Жыл бұрын

​@@etyplt he wants a better language for javascripts uses

@Saaad2

Жыл бұрын

@@etypltLOL! looks like you aren't sure what he wants.. he really has good points

@quanle760

Жыл бұрын

Yes. But that is not good enough 😂

@alishapayne4121

Жыл бұрын

@@etyplt Yes it is unclear but imo he's trying to shake up the status quo and he might be doing it in a sort of "cheeky" manner but that doesn't make it not true. He was a massive proponent and contributor to js in the past (and what I would call a web pioneer in many ways), I think he's trying to instil some of the "inventing" spirit from back then into us now. It's not about having the answer right now but rather about believing it's possible to even start the journey! That turned into a bit of a ramble but I hope you know what I mean. :)

@MGK734

Жыл бұрын

I agree.

What is the alternative. I really hate javascript.

@okseaj

Жыл бұрын

Golang

@praveens2272

Жыл бұрын

@@okseaj it's a server side programming language

@okseaj

Жыл бұрын

@@praveens2272 yeah and JS is pervasive as a server side solution so we can at least stop using it there and use better alternatives

@ryanleemartin7758

Жыл бұрын

I believe wasm is answer to this problem

@-Engineering01-

Жыл бұрын

​@@okseaj but i have yet to see any go lang jobs in 2rd world countries. Mostly Java, C# and nodejs.

the problem comes down to cost of maintenance and upgrade. once the plane is in the air and it needs to stay in the air how do you migrate passengers inflight?

This has been an effect in the industry for a long time now. Once a large number of people have been trained on a language, the amount of economic inertia created is huge. I remember thinking this about C++ in the early 2000s. Maybe more focus should be put on thinking of programming languages as a social norm, and an ecosystem, rather than as a simple technical exercise. Maybe government has more of a role to play. If you could create a cleaner JS that doesn't take much retraining (or has retraining materials built in to complier messages, and an official IDE), I think it would be easier to get adoption up. That way the expertise base is essentially the same size.

I just wish there was a better solution for multithreading in JavaScript... It's pretty awful to use web workers. Something like the goroutine or TBB parallel for would make things much easier and enable far larger projects!

@Robula

Жыл бұрын

Use a better language.

@VelvetCondoms

Жыл бұрын

Child processes are a salvageable workaround.

@jimiscott

Жыл бұрын

Wasm Wasm wasm

That's why Typescript was created to address some of the shortcomings of Javascript. I don't see people stopping using js anytime soon.

@TitusM7

Жыл бұрын

Except i still see garbage TS code where everything is messy everything is “any” still as confusing and trash as js code.

@oscarljimenez5717

Жыл бұрын

​@@TitusM7 with a simple eslint and tsconfig you can fix that (in my codebases i don't allow any). Sadly you can't be so restrictive with this, because incremental adoption.

@moestaxx286

Жыл бұрын

good news bc i am learning the whole javascript ecosystem still😭

@TitusM7

Жыл бұрын

@@oscarljimenez5717 true but some people adopt typescript but never let go of the things typescript is trying to fix. We have projects that started with TS and they are absolutely messy, too damn hard to read and work around.

@MGK734

Жыл бұрын

Honestly I don't think TS resolved the problem. Yes created new rules for developer and added another level of the complexity, whenever you want to use 3rd party library you need to learn a new type from that library. It's not a solid typed solution IMHO, I rather have to deal with C#. I don't like the possibility of creating types. TypeScript tries to mimic C#, I would just go with C#.

I agree 100% with everything he said. And that's why I've been years in development on a new platform that allows for the easy development & adoption of new languages.

My job depends on javascript BUT I would follow crockford and his advice any day. The last real language developers and creators were the last generation. Everything that he just said here resonated 30+ years of history.

I use ClojureScript for all my frontend work. There are other excellent options like Elm.

@GreyDeathVaccine

11 ай бұрын

Any comments on libraries for ClojureScript? Are they any good? How often do you need to write your own code because there is no library for it?

It’s true: there is some crap in JavaScript and it can’t be removed because of backwards compatibility. But the great thing is, all the crappy parts have good equivalents. You don’t have to use the crappy parts. When you use modern JavaScript, it’s actually a nice language. JavaScript has features many other languages don’t have. It’s asynchronous, event-driven and has first-class functions. Also, if you want to use types, you can use TypeScript.

@kusalg

Жыл бұрын

I have yet to see people be disciplined about that tho.

@oussama40612

Жыл бұрын

The problem is we live in a delusion of modern functionalities because once we need to compile it to make it work on most browsers, we get into package/build/NPM/dependency hell

@nivethan_me

Жыл бұрын

@@kusalg just setup eslint properly and you'll be fine

Thank you very much for your opinion. I appreciate very much such experienced and knowledgeable man. But what instead of JavaScript which is present in all web browsers around the World? I'm Go programmer and even if I want to compile my sources to WASM then JavaScript seems to be irreplaceable. Could you please expand your vision and give more light on it, what new languages you admire the most and why ?

it would be nice to know some examples of those 'mistakes in OS, runtime and languages'. Especially the OS part.

are you guys ask him which programming lang he used to code recently? just curious

@WatashiwaWatashi-zw7hy

Ай бұрын

I believe he uses Dart right now. bcz I think there's no other languages that is better than Dart

"It's time for the next thing." Funny enough, this is a core philosophy of the JS community itself. That's why we have so many new frameworks out there.

@Xaero324

11 ай бұрын

@ghost mall There's nothing "shaky" about JS... only bad practices. This can be true for many other languages. Everything has it's pros and cons.

@kitebeachinnbeachinn2888

11 ай бұрын

@@Xaero324 Reacjs solved a huge problem compared to Jquery but the rest are only reinventing the wheel with a good exception Vuejs.

@DavidLoveMore

11 ай бұрын

A large part of the problem is the development philosophy. People are using unstable experimental frameworks in production. We need to make and use finished code.

@Ian-zj1bu

11 ай бұрын

​@@kitebeachinnbeachinn2888 are you kidding? I don't think anything has solved more problems in JS than what jQuery did. To unify different browser implementations of rendering stuff to the screen, React sits atop a pile of other useless UI frameworks. Yes, mistakes were made in jQuery, just like everything else made with a computer but to dismiss it's achievements as trivial seems unfair, bordering uninformed. I used to get paid to write JS, then it was React, now it is Vue... it's all just JS. 15+ years after picking up the language, jQuery still holds top spot for me in order or respect, even though I rarely ever use it when engaging in legacy web applications... My advice to anyone reading this, try NativeScript instead of React Native... there's no hype train but it's just better.

@StSava-zm8tf

11 ай бұрын

@@kitebeachinnbeachinn2888 You sound like a clueless coding bootcamp graduate. Vanilla and jQuery have everything you need to build a solid frontend. Simple, understandable and easy to debug. React on the other hand is a bunch of abstractions and weird syntax. Difficult to comprehend, debugging is a nightmare.. ends up being a mess of buggy "reusable" components that never get reused.

Many years ago i start programming in javascript because of his speeches. Then i stop using javascript last 1.5 years. Finally Douglass Crockford himself said stop using javascript. Thank you.

It's just mater of finding/creating a good balance in terms of a solid language with an improved architecture, that's easy to use, and supports most of the modern features that web developers need. Some really good applications like Figma are powered by WASM, but I'm not sure that every web developer would get use to it.

I switched back to basics.HTML, JavaScript and CSS for the front end and WAMP stack for the back end. That's All I need.

@peterkabiru5144

Жыл бұрын

glad to see your comment, I feel I need to do the same.and leave out all this javascript frameworks that are poping all the time I'm exhausted in trying to figure out how they work...I'm finding it as time wasting instead of focusing on building the project I want with just HTML css and JS..what is your advise

@Saurabhkumar-bn3dl

11 ай бұрын

​@@peterkabiru5144Bro you cannot possibly make any real world applications without using those frameworks, it will be so bad that at one point you just cannot keep up with the complexity. It will be terrible. There are so many frameworks out there but they are not all same. Every framkework does things differently. If you want to enjoy and have a good time go with svelte, solids. If you really wanna step up to find a big job go with react and it's superset next. That's all really.

@kissmeifyouloveme5983

Ай бұрын

Use nodejs for the backend

@Deb_deCoder

Ай бұрын

​@@Saurabhkumar-bn3dl I bet you don't know JS properly

@Saurabhkumar-bn3dl

Ай бұрын

@@Deb_deCoder Sure whatever helps you sleep at night.

We can definitely make something better, but the curve for meeting the current best solutions when starting from scratch is just so high, and the current best languages will be the last to be overtaken, which means they will only amass more adoption over time until they are simply no longer feasible for use. Learning curves are tough as well.

So if I understand this correctly if we keep javascript we should also be able to script pages using Fortran?

Glad to have been a raw coder and avoided short cuts for 13 years and yet going on

Really a hard one to remove, JavaScript is in 98% of the website and decades of work wasted on working on this programming language

@seymourkoop9381

Жыл бұрын

The only way to remove it is to replace it. I was hoping Douglass would offer a suggestion on what to replace it with, but no.

@antdx316

Жыл бұрын

It's a tested and proven language. With new ones, there could be security issues. Adobe Macromedia Flash had the best performance, but of course, the security vulnerabilities weren't good.

@nivethan_me

Жыл бұрын

@@seymourkoop9381 lets say Douglass suggested Golang or Rust then what? building the web from scratch?

@thanhlengoc3805

Жыл бұрын

@@seymourkoop9381 you can't. If a replacement ever become a movement in the tech industry, it would simply be re-inventing the wheel. For the longest time, "replacement" has always been built on top of older tech, until the older tech become something we take for granted.

Is there a longer version of this interview?

@ptdecker

24 күн бұрын

I was wondering the same. Especially how it just leaves off hanging

There is C# (2001), Swift (2014) etc. when you get away from the web? And there is always typescript (1996) which is a significant improvement

I would love a typed version of javascript that's not full-on TypeScript. Many thanks to Douglas -- his was the first book I read on JS. He imparts knowledge in a no BS, no ego kind of way. I learned a lot from him (and from his linter). For me, I don't do much framework/virtual DOM stuff. Vanilla JS/Jquery works fine for me.

JavaScript can at least be as dirty as C with the added problem that the vast majority of people writing JS never learned the fundamentals and therefore are not aware of how bad the stuff they tinker with until it just works seemingly is. There are good reasons why your introduction into programming at university is not JS (though it might use some and that I think is actually worthwhile despite students not getting why they should work with 3+ languages right from the start [and aiming for real deep understanding of one {that is not JS}]).

@C2H6Cd

11 ай бұрын

I like your nested brackets 😊

@Coding-to4zj

10 ай бұрын

there is no dirty about some dom manipulation and http requests and some browser api. you are delusional. take it from someone who wrote a chess engine in c++ and in js

I agree that JS is, emphasis on *is*, a really good language. Surprisingly, refreshingly good. The obvious possibility besides starting over, is to bifurcate with JS 2.0, simply removing all the cruft and reducing the language to the "good stuff", and freezing 1.0. Then the version is indicated in the script tag, and the old stuff continues to run as is, and those wanting to move forward are forced to either separate their code or remove the cruft from their existing code before declaring it to be 2.0. Nobody is forced to rewrite old, working code, only to package 1.0 code separately from 2.0 code. He's right, JS has accumulated cruft; but the solution is not to discard JS, it's to discard the cruft in a tolerably backward compatible way.

I tried to learn Javascript from Steve Suehring's Microsoft book but got bogged down in chapter 8, called Objects in Javascript. I had worked with objects before in Visual Basic and other languages but I couldn't fathom this Javascript version. I typed a large section of the chapter on a Javascript forum and the concensus was: 'Is this author trying to confuse everyone?'. After that, I gave up.

@Ni7ram

11 ай бұрын

lmaao

I clicked on this video thinking this was going to be trash, but I totally agree. I'd be really awesome to see some inovation here

For this to happen, browsers have to improve and support better languages.

@a-yon_n

11 ай бұрын

If there are such languages. The language a frontend application runs must be interpreted at run time, something you can type and run in the integrated REPL, I don’t see there is any other language thare can compare to JavaScript.

@scottanderson2871

11 ай бұрын

@@a-yon_nwhat????

That's sound good but there's a lot of problem with that. 1.) JavaScript is so embedded in our system especially the web. That it is hard to just stop using it. The fact that all browsers are using it. Is what makes it hard. 2.) Where will the people (developers) go? I think it will create more problem. Unless we already have some alternatives that can be use by web browser (or in some case server) that we can use directly. Or else people will be wandering around. I think we should stop making JavaScript complicated for now. Only when it really gets bad, and we actually have a solution, then that we should stop using it.

nice - but no mention of what specifically is the next step or the way forward. wasm for instance?

Been considering moving our tech to rust or go. Problem is. The labour pool shrinks a lot when you choose something that's not one of the big 3

I don't think the problem here is really JavaScript itself, but the way the web platform is & its starting. On the web, any feature once added will stay forever. Many of JavaScript's early bad design decisions are frozen in time & its impossible to make the language & its runtime better when you gotta support all the crap it has generated in the 1990s & 2000s. And the language was always kind of seen as an "irrelevant tech that would be DOA" in the 90s, especially considering how much Microsoft hurt its development while trying to push its JScript or whatever trying to take over the internet. And now after all the damage from the early days, we have Microsoft itself inventing a language (TS) and monopolizing the web development world with the now damaged JavaScript with all the bad design decisions becoming "something not scalable & to avoid".

@MelroyvandenBerg

Жыл бұрын

Yea stupid Microsoft

@m.m3633

Жыл бұрын

Yes, it was Microsoft being the cancer.

@oneminutecoder

Жыл бұрын

@DarkmoonUK

Жыл бұрын

No, the problem is JavaScript itself. It's objectively a bad language that became popular by being in the wrong place at the right time. A language that doesn't even support integer numbers!? Come on...

@Potato_Quality7

Жыл бұрын

@@DarkmoonUK What do you mean, it doesn't support integer numbers?

I remember when Java script came on the scene. I played with it a little. I remember a java applet that enabled you to post a rotation of pictures in a window. it was powerful, dynamic and horrendously unstable.

11 ай бұрын

Applets are a Java technology, not Javascript. It seems you don't know what JavaScript aka ECMAScript is.

@glenrisk5234

11 ай бұрын

@ Apparently not. I thought the script used to access the engine was Java script. That is what it was called at the time, the script you had to define in the page header to be able to use it in the web page. The script that defined how the applet would appear and function. I know the applet itself was not the script used to access it in the engine. But you seem to be saying that Javascript is an entirely different thing, that it is inappropriate to describe the script used to access the Java Engine from a web page as javascript?

11 ай бұрын

@@glenrisk5234 Correct, although Java and Javascript sound similar, these are 2 completly different and unrelated languages/technologies. People often confuse them because of the naming. This was done intentionally because Java was the No.1 most hyped language when JS came out, and they wanted to ride on the hype train. Before it was called Mocha and LiveScript. The official name is ECMAScript.

I loved JavaScript as a beginner and still love to use it to spin up new projects quickly but once you're beyond a certain level of application there are and should be much cleaner approaches. It is definitely smelly on full enterprise applications but some of the languages I've learned for enterprise work, I would have hated when I was learning to code. I think it's an excellent language for learning.

What are you going to use for the browser, then? Rust with WASM?

I don't believe his main audience is the web-based developers responding in the comments rather the people who create the APIs used primarily by these web devs. Another language could interact with the DOM or grab canvas elements but for some reason it's seen as niche. I personally am just happy to see HTML and CSS become robust enough that JavaScript is less necessary as well as more fresh and modernly robust languages release and find some adoption.

@user-cx8rl2cd2l

Жыл бұрын

HTML and css programming language 😂😂😂😂😂?

@Ccb780

Жыл бұрын

@@user-cx8rl2cd2l no? Nowhere above do I use the word programming at all right?

@josemaker5252

Жыл бұрын

​@@user-cx8rl2cd2lHe never uses the word programming. Besides, HTML is now receiving new features that can dictate behavior so that no JavaScript is needed, so it *is* stepping into territory that used to be require complicated programming

@user-cx8rl2cd2l

Жыл бұрын

@@Ccb780 html and css are not programming languages! it's not even interpreted code.

@user-cx8rl2cd2l

Жыл бұрын

@@josemaker5252 smart ass ! and how will you make me handle the user form on an event in html?

"Somehow we don't do that" whenever you find yourself saying this, realize that you are one of the few select that have the potential to change things, and that complaining won't change these things for you.

I really wish he would have mentioned what are the bad points he is referring to regarding the web and OSes. Does anybody know if he dives into that somewhere else?

People who are wise are seldom listened to, and business people who know nothing make tech decisions. I still have Crockford videos on JavaScript that I downloaded probably 15 years ago, because he actually taught the language fully.

I read that initially Google planned to include Dart interpreter in Chrome, but that plan was quickly scrapped. Maybe that would've been a solution.

@kelvinsanyaolu4899

Жыл бұрын

Dart sucks

@acrosstundras

Жыл бұрын

@@kelvinsanyaolu4899 why?

@ryanleemartin7758

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, I think they ran into the same problem every other javascript replacement to date ran into ... the web's immune system rejected a rogue vm . The best option is wasm which will just make JS less important by relegating it to just another language option

@Robula

Жыл бұрын

​@@kelvinsanyaolu4899Then you're part of the problem.

@EdouardTavinor

Жыл бұрын

I quite like dart as a language. It's like the understandable bits of typescript without the legacy JavaScript stuff. It still compiles really well to JavaScript, so you can write web sites with it. JavaScript to me is like assembly. Yeah, you can write software with it, but it's probably best not to. Typescript is like assembly with some macros.

Evolution should be natural and not forced. Technology has been evolving as has Javascript over time, but I wouldn't want us to do to JS what we did to Flash. That was a shame.

@Ni7ram

11 ай бұрын

IT WAS. a shame :(

@filipbergman4232

11 күн бұрын

I know this is old but I disagree. We might get stuck at a local peak with this approach.

Sir, then, which language do suggest doing aftervleaving aside JavaScript? What about Python? PHP?

I could never agree more with what he said. So, so true. And as he said, not just JS, web itself, and a lot of other languages as well can go along...

A completely reasonable, sound and logical thing to believe. Unfortunately, corporations hell-bent on making money won't see it that way.

@nataliemreow

11 ай бұрын

Amazing comment.

I think this is particularly evident in the way web apps are developed using npm. One of the main reasons debugging these apps is such a pain is because the npm ecosystem is broken. The apps are bloated with a lot of dependencies stacked one on top of the other and you are thrown errors sometimes that take days to triage. Other languages like Java and Python seem to be less afflicted by such problems. The wide spread adoption of JavaScript makes it hard to supplant the language. TypeScript gets around the duck typing quirks, but it’s not sufficient.

@ydoomenaud

Жыл бұрын

I solved this problem by not using npm in the first place

@aaditkamat4995

Жыл бұрын

@@ydoomenaud I have been using yarn, but the problems persist. What do you use for web development then?

@yvrelna

Жыл бұрын

My package manager is to just use the bloody tag 😂

@aaditkamat4995

Жыл бұрын

@@yvrelna yeah that’s one way. But I think as the site gets bigger, fetching all of these dependencies through CDNs increase site latency substantially.

@doc8527

11 ай бұрын

we live in different spectrum I guess, I personally rarely had critical issues with npm/pnpm, yarn, you can name it. It's simply because I used open source lib, I also created and maintained OS libs, hence I pretty much had an idea why some of quirky issues we have. So I hardly agree your point that "web apps suffer by npm" but it made sense from a user perspective. In fact, when I used other languages, their package management system/tooling/docs are so bad that the dev experience is not even close to JavaScript ecosystem. I assume that partial reasons are that javascript is so BAD, yes it's so bad that :P forces the js devs further polishing a lot of JS libs/tools to make up the difference. Goes back to the original video, I do agree with that web devs nowadays shouldn't waste their time on JS to fix those issues, we should look for something better. Maybe a better web language, like rust? However, it might come with an "adaptation cost" (not migration cost but developer adaptation pain) and a period of degradation, if any new performant languages that has a high learning barrier that can easily trap developers into making subtle mistakes. Even though the language is widely adopted, we might have a worse UX in general because most new web apps with that language will likely be built terribly that perform far worse than using JavaScript. The reason I said that it's because in the past few years a lot of terrible React apps were built that is still using the mindset of MPA instead of SPA, or abusing useEffect, do jquery way dom manipulation in react app, do rendering during animation, do JavaScript manipulation instead of using CSS because they get used to do everything in javascript in React. They are so bad that they should stick to their old jquery php setup instead of doing migration for the sake of market/technical trending.

I just want to thank DC for teaching me all about recursion and closures and currying, and how hoisting worked... And the IIFE!

I wonder what are his thoughts on Elm, if he has any. For me, I have been usint TS for the last 4 years. But I'm learning elm for fun

Aha - I remember those old days when a new language popped out pherhaps every 2 years. But in those days we did not have the mass of programmers we have now and we did not have the big tech . These two things create a huge inertia - evolution is slow and getting rid of the past is allmost impossible. Perhaps, is not technically impossible but economically makes no sense For this reason we are still using languages created 30 years ago and my bet is we will continue with them at least for the next coming 2 decades.

Douglas Crockford a legend and a great teacher... I have read his books on Javascript. That something else he speaks about is probably a very evolved version of Javascript.

Interesting take. I think to allow for such a move there would be needed something radically different that wouldn't allow for the old languages and approaches to come in. But even today when there is something new there is always a rush to enable it to work with JavaScript or something along those lines. This approach is also more set in the theoretical than practical field as was mentioned by others. Having the access to uncounted number of libraries and packages for the existing languages is more appealing than having to start from scratch and companies are going to choose the former every time.

Nobocdy cares? People seem hyped on Rust, Go and Zig.

I’m pretty hopeful about Mojo as a new language (still in beta I believe). The developer, Chris Lattner, is a badass. It’s worth watching his last 2 Lex Fridman podcasts to see where it’s going. Most powerful and exciting language probably ever made and it uses Python syntax.

@mohammadhassan1649

11 ай бұрын

Lol

@GiantsOnTheHorizon

11 ай бұрын

@@mohammadhassan1649 why is that funny? If you're focusing on the Python they simply use the Syntax and not the interpreter. It's a completely new animal but, you can use your Python skills to run it. Anyway, just remember this when you're either developing in it in a few years or wishing you could.

@Hytpu9

11 ай бұрын

@@GiantsOnTheHorizon why r u so agressive man -_-

@Ni7ram

11 ай бұрын

well i loved swift, so i put my bets on this guy

@GiantsOnTheHorizon

11 ай бұрын

@@Hytpu9 if you thought that was an aggressive comment I wish you well in the world.

There's always been this "grass is greener" approach and I don't mind optimism. But if nobody comes up with a better alternative, then this is where we stay!

Webassembly has been around for like 7 years now, but it hasn't exactly taken off, and I seriously doubt it ever will..

my programming role model and taught me js 20 yrs ago 😓

@Honeypotio

Жыл бұрын

I guess it's a good reminder that you can always change your mind in life 💛

Javascript is awesome dispite its pitfalls. It is a language that was not prepared for what is the web today, that explain all the things that has been added. I think if we introduce another language, that will be very expensive(new engines). And what are we going to do with the billons of Javascript code already running in the web?

@MrOnePieceRuffy

Жыл бұрын

We should stop using Computers.. because, what we going to do with the billions of books and movies on physical devices? Just let them go and go into the future? Not with Lucas, guys.

Жыл бұрын

Javascript is terrible.

@ryanleemartin7758

Жыл бұрын

That's just the stockholm talking. :)

@ryanleemartin7758

Жыл бұрын

In my view , wasm is probably that "new engine". It turns the browser into a compile target.

@thephoenixstudio

Жыл бұрын

​@ I haven't had any issues with JS for at least 10 years since the browser wars issues.

Then what will we use instead of JavaScript when doing front-end web development? WASM?

Interesting points... Seems like it has to be driven at a browser level - Google specifically would have to drive this imho. The power of JS for me is that it works in a browser and backend (node) - for web dev it's super nice to be in one language throughout the presentation layers. I wonder if we are passed the point of no-return, however, considering all the apps and frameworks in JS... It'd be a huge undertaking ...

@tecTitus

11 ай бұрын

Using js on the backend is doing more harm than good, when better alternatives already exist.

@GramKracker88

11 ай бұрын

what harm is it doing?

JavaScript will be here to stay unless browsers treat it as a second citizen to favour a particular language or let WASM takes over. People still use JavaScript not because it is evolving or getting types from TypeScript (enjoy the setup process), but because it is the only most convenient choice to do all the magic in the browser, WASM is great but does not directly manipulate the DOM, every browser has a JS engine unless a browser or all browsers treat JS as a second citizen or WASM able to directly manipulate the DOM without a layer of JS, JavaScript is here to stay, and it has to evolve better.

The problem is recreating the ecosystem, there's a reason JavaScript, Java, even PHP still have a huge marketshare, no new language will have the support and libraries ready available on launch, that alone would create alot more problems than a new language would solve.

@gabrielpauna62

Жыл бұрын

Very good point, it's quite synonymous with any kind of tech really, the industry goes towards languages that are widely adopted or ones that are profitable that's why they went for C and then Java

so what should we be looking at? he forgot to mention

By the way, what is the language I should replace JS for?

I think syntactic layers on top of base languages are what’s missing, but JavaScript basically supports syntactic layering on top of it. JavaScript says yes to everything you want to do, good or bad. Before you even ask the question, JavaScript says yes. It’s basically the assembly layer for humans, on top of which many many projects/languages/frameworks have built their syntax on top of. The beauty of JavaScript is that no matter what syntax the application uses on top of this human assembly, you can always use any other syntax built on top of it to interact with it. JavaScript has done more to evolve language syntax than any other language because of this. If a syntax or framework sucks, we don’t have to use it. No specialized interop api needs to be created and maintained to do so. I agree that JavaScript has mistakes in it, but the only thing that could possibly replace it is some new language that is designed with a syntactic sugar layer/engine/api designed and maintained alongside the language. Consider how C# is being updated to improve the syntax, but it will only ever be the c# syntax. At the end of the day it will compile down to native or .net code anyways, but the syntax will only ever be C# The syntax only evolves via comity. JavaScript being the language that says yes to everything, is itself that human assembly upon which any syntax can be supported

@mariusg8824

11 ай бұрын

Imho you should take a look at an extremely strongly typed language like F#, to see how big the differences actually are, that Javascript is far from being "complete", thus a sufficient foundation of anything that might follow. Imho, the necessity for dynamic typing turned out to be limited. It has its use cases, but there are already languages that demonstrate far better than JavaScript how to do this properly.

@LowestofheDead

11 ай бұрын

That's the motivation behind Web Assembly/WASM

There are so many cool, safe, robust languages out there, but I'm in it for the incredible community that keeps pushing the language's limits. I've yet to find such a vibrant community elsewhere. It's typescript today, and it might be another iteration/ evolution or rethink of javascript, but wherever this community goes, I'll follow. For me it's the safest bet.

@SRG-Learn-Code

Жыл бұрын

Types are coming to javascript

@user-manager

11 ай бұрын

Types are shit. Other languages are shit. Language better than JS is still to be invented.

@user-manager

11 ай бұрын

And by "better" I mean the language ergonomics.

@igordasunddas3377

11 ай бұрын

@@user-manager what's that exactly?

@user-manager

11 ай бұрын

@@igordasunddas3377 That's how much time you spend on understanding the code you wrote last year provided that it was written well. That's generally all about time. Because life is short and nobody seems to care until meet his own death.

Besides the other well known pros the most important feature of JS which became a turning point is that it allows people to write a completely irresponsible code.

The “we just keep piling on new features to an old product” idea is so right. We need a reset of complexity in order to start adding more again. Piled on features need to be converted to stock features so the cycle of piling can begin again, and so new users can learn the new stuff rather than the mountain of piled features.

I'm all for letting the market decide. Make a better language and people will eventually figure it out. But I think you'll find out the benefit from switching from JS will be so small (in practical terms) that most people won't bother. Because at the end of the day, JS might not be a very good language according to some academic metric, but it's a great tool to solve the problems most devs face.