Friday, August 15th, 2008

ECMAScript Harmony: Brendan Eich, Douglas Crockford, Adobe, and more

Category: Interview, JavaScript

ECMAScript Harmony has been the big news of the week. It isn’t hard to see why, the next version of JavaScript is going to affect us all, for a long time (even more than a presidents term!)

Alex Russell, John Resig, and myself got Brendan Eich and Arun Ranganathan on the phone to talk about the news. This is episode 2 of the Open Web Podcast (see the new website, and subscribe to the series, including via iTunes.)

The podcast is over an hour long and goes into a ton of detail covering a lesson on language design, politics and process, a lot of history, and hopefully the path to a positive future.

We have other postings going on in the community too. Douglas Crockford writes an opinion on how The Only Thing We Have To Fear Is Premature Standardization, Mike Chambers wraps up the thoughts of Adobe on ActionScript 3 and ECMAScript 4, and Alex Russell talks sense into the fallout.

Have you seen any interesting posts or thoughts on the news?

Posted by Dion Almaer at 10:28 am

4 rating from 25 votes


Comments feed TrackBack URI

Great podcast for anyone wanting to learn about JavaScript or any other language and the thinking that goes into the design.

Comment by digitalIchi — August 15, 2008

It’s nice to hear that packages and namespaces weren’t scrapped to appease less ambitious designers, but for consideration of how they solve the problems they were added to solve.

Comment by eyelidlessness — August 15, 2008

I don’t understand why Javascript isn’t just thrown out the window, and replaced by something very similar to C#… JScript#

strongly typed with extreme performance…
I’m sure its possible to create Eval-like functionalities…

and while we are at it… standardize all browsers in such a way, that you never have to use the word “Crossbrowser”

Damn I hate the current mess we are in !

Comment by Montago — August 18, 2008

I strongly disagree with Montago. Javascript is an excellent language, and certainly not in need of major changes to be fast and powerful (it’s already fast and powerful where implementors care). The compatibility issues aren’t a fault of the language. They’re a fault of the implementors, and secondarily, to a lesser degree, the DOM committee.

Comment by eyelidlessness — August 18, 2008

@Montage: Choose two of these: Fast, Powerful, Cheap.

I would argue that C# or JScript# are not “Cheap”. Javascript’s main draw is that it is cheap, well within the reach of newbie web designers.

Comment by C4 — August 18, 2008

…the properties of dynamically typed languages suit the web more… I wouldn’t place one of these properties as “cheap”, however. I expect and hope to see JavaScript, Ruby, and Python runtimes in the browser over time. Looking forward to that approaching day.

Comment by holts — August 18, 2008

After listening to the podcast, it seems that the essence of harmony is a return to practicality: trying to find the simplest solutions for concrete problems actual javascript developers have. As a developer I like that a lot.

Comment by Joeri — August 19, 2008

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.