Hacker News Reader

Comment by zeveb | Hacker News Reader

> Spend 50 hours building anything substantial with JavaScript and you'll get a good handle on them, and you'll be good to go for the next 10,000 hours.

Spending 10,000 hours building things with JavaScript sounds like a pretty good definition of Hell.

JavaScript is an actively, abusively bad language. It's not that it has a few warts: it's nothing but warts. Its fundamental design flaws are obscured only by its superficial design flaws.

It's a really bad, tasteless language.

> I don't think that's a reason for anyone to stoop to the level you have, though.

I really don't think he 'stooped' to anything.

View on HN

In case Eich reads your comment: given that it had to be done in ten days and "look like Java", JavaScript is a fine langauge.

(But yeah, compared to languages that were designed over years obviously it's incredibly bad.)

To quote Eich (from here[1]):

" Ten days to implement the lexer, parser, bytecode emitter (which I folded into the parser; required some code buffering to reorder things like the for(;;) loop head parts and body), interpreter, built-in classes, and decompiler. I had help only for jsdate.c, from Ken Smith of Netscape (who, per our over-optimistic agreement, cloned java.util.Date -- Y2K bugs and all! Gosling...).

Sorry, not enough time for me to analyze tail position (using an attribute grammar approach: http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:proper_tail_...). Ten days without much sleep to build JS from scratch, "make it look like Java" (I made it look like C), and smuggle in its saving graces: first class functions (closures came later but were part of the plan), Self-ish prototypes (one per instance, not many as in Self).

I'll do better in the next life. "

[1] Edit: jwz.org intercepts HN links. See mjgoeke's comment.

I'd recommend copy+pasting the link to www.jwz.org if you want to open it...

  https://www.jwz.org/blog/2010/10/every-day-i-learn-something-new-and-stupid/#comment-1048

> The ecosystem is terrible and the community is full of self-righteous assholes who has the collective attention span of a 2 year old

> I don't think he 'stooped' to anything

Really? This is supposed to be a place for civil, mature discussion. There are plenty of valid arguments against javascript as a language and as a community, there's no need for childish comments like that.

I don't understand why people say javascript is such an awful language. The "Wat" video previously posted features of a few javascript idiosyncrasies, but I think most people would consider such obscure syntax combinations to be ill mannered, and most people understand to be very careful around type conversions.

At a higher level of organization, the language begins to matter less and less, and what matters more are that subcomponents within a larger system obey their contracts, and that there's some concurrency strategy if you have distributed state.

I don't understand why people say javascript is such an awful language.

Frankly, because from a language design perspective, it is - or at least used to be: Bad scoping rules (implicit global declarations by default, function instead of lexical block scope if var is present), weird implicit conversions, no good story for code reuse/object extension so everyone doing anything complex had to cook up their own version, ...

Nevertheless, I actually enjoy programming in Javascript ;)

> It's a really bad, tasteless language.

It's really not that bad. It's actually a good language, and getting better all the time. See? We can go back and forth, without any substance.

But seriously, modern JS is not that bad.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com