Matthias said:
Matthias said:
On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 05:24:40 -0500, Kenny wrote:
Matthias Watermann wrote:
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 14:25:46 -0500, Kenny wrote:
[...]
After doing that he'll see hundreds if not thousands of warnings.
Warnings? I turned on warnings, saw things like "might return NULL". But
that option also stopped FF cold so I could not see it thru to the end.
And that doesn't make you think?
The option in firebug itself warns of serious degradation. Multiply that
by 800kb and no, it does not concern me.
And there were other problems such as
referencing undefined properties
OK, so I say if (x.y)... and y lacks the property altogether so the test
fails, fine. If I do arithmetic with it it fails the first time I run
the code. If the concern is insufficient code coverage in unit tests we
are back to the strong static typing debate -- is that it?
and functions not always returning a
value etc.pp.
As a Lisper I certainly appreciate functional programming, but I am not
surprised others do not and even I write functions only for their
side-effects so why does a function always have to return a value?
I am starting to think this is definitely the issue: the classic debate
over strong static typing.
[...]
Is that what this is all about?
Now, if a library doesn't even get the semantics of its language right
(just look at what JSLint can tell you about it) I'm not very much
inclined to validate its logic.
Your conclusion simply does not follow. It would follow if the library
authors with you liked the idea of the compiler verifying everything and
the library came up short in that respect, but I am guessing most
javascript developers are more into the "agile" thing one gets with
languages such as Python/Ruby/Perl/Lisp in which one does not get all
OCD as mandated by, say, C++ and even worse Java.
But obviously your tolerance is much
higher and apparently you don't care about the users of the application
you're trying to build.
The second half of that sentence is complete bullshit. But you obviously
know that.
Why should I get involved with a project that obviously doesn't care about
a "clean" code base? No, thank you very much. And the fact that the
software is copyrighted by a big ISP doesn't make me feel better at all.
Everything is /copyrighted/ by its author whether they put a copyright
on it or not. The question is the license, and unless I missed something
theirs is fine.
[...]
Or are we waiting for the Open Source Fairy to leave one under our
pillow? That would be awesome!
It would be a nice surprise, indeed. But as that probably won't happen
for the time being I'll stick with my own code that evolved over the
years. But, again, if you're happy with that swollen package please
yourself. Just stop marketing here.
Marketing? Good developers tend to like sharing news of good tools with
others. Usenet is a good way for developers to learn about good tools.
It is how I got turned onto Lisp, and only because some Lisper mentioned
qooxdoo did I find it. Had I not I would probably have lost the contract
already. Instead I am ripping thru the app resurrecting it so fast the
client has forgotten about the past four weeks. (Final verdict still
out, I'll keep you posted.)
Folks visiting/lurking this group would probably like to program in JS.
The stuff you guys discuss is useful for that, because those issues do
have to be addressed if one wants to do the moral equivalent of Web
assembler*. Good frameworks like qooxdoo are also useful because they go
the other way and let me work at a higher level.
Some good developers also tend to get religious over static typing (to
abbreviate the issue) and I can see a few here have allowed their strong
preference on that to dictate their assessment of JS libraries.
You guys should make it clear when denouncing qooxdoo that it violates
your C++/Java-training, not that it is a bad library. Better yet, you
should learn to enjoy programming and stop agonizing over always
returning a value.
I do not care what you say about the other libraries.
peace, kenny
* That might by me -- I want to do a framework driven by Lisp so I do
not have to write so much JS, with a bare minimum of generic JS to
actually drive the browser. p.k