gabriele said:
il Mon, 14 Jun 2004 07:34:27 -0400, Bil Kleb <
[email protected]> ha
scritto::
The article is little old, and IIRC the common comments about it were:
'Stupid SUN employee, you had Self that solved all this and you choose
to develop that dumb bracket-based language.'
Here's a more recent case of "Oh, why wasn't it Ruby?"
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public...iscuss/2004Jun/att-0000/2004jun01.html#topic3
Bert Bos: Nearly 10 years ago, HTML was in danger. Extensions for layout
made HTML less useful, proprietary extensions, etc. so we created
stylesheets. CSS is now being taken up, but HTML is in danger again.
JavaScript is the worst invention ever. At first we though we could
replace JavaScript with style sheets (rollovers, hover, etc.) and Java
for applications, but Java is not so great for simple programs.
Bert Bos: So, perhaps we need a scripting language or two for the 80%,
with the logic separate from the UI so that programs are portable,
device independent, accessible, maintainable, re-usable...right from the
start. Let's use the knowledge of the web to design something clean that
will last for a long time. In my mind, separating the program from the
logic is the most important thing, just as we did for HTML, separating
the style from the content.
Bert Bos: Imagine we could dstart from scratch, leave hte difficult 20%
to Java, take two years to define our language, and two more years for
version 2. (Shows diagram and simulation of three components: UI, Webapp
(comprising UI and Logic), and then the Web. That is what we hope to
achieve.
Bert Bos: Imagine and easy high-level interpreted programming language
(something like Ruby?), and a 2-way pipe to an easy high-level
declarative UI language (something like Gist?). View source for client
side. This is perhaps a simple 80% solution.
