I can neither say that nor remember it, and while JavaScript is owned by Oracle, at least it is memorable (And everyone will know what you're talking about when you say it out loud).
Just put native TypeScript support in the browsers, and let's just use the term TypeScript and also have a language with actual types in it(!).
Poor ECMA having an unfortunate starting acronym.
A linguistic prescriptivist might say it was wrong because people might say something they want to emphasise like 'my phone is literally blowing up' - but according to the traditional meaning of the word literally, that means it would be literally blowing up, like an actual explosion.
Once 'literally' just means 'emphasise this' then you have to go into further contortions if you actually want to express something that means something that is exactly as described, not figuratively.
I suppose emphasis can turn into exaggeration, then literally is indeed a bad fit. But it can be emphasizing something without exaggeration too.
I.e. "literally days ago". Which indeed can mean a few days ago, but it's emphasizing it. I don't think it's a wrong usage.
For example, suppose somebody says "I'm so hungry, I could literally eat an elephant." It's obvious that they're being hyperbolic because of course nobody eats elephants. Adding literally just adds to the hyperbole because it makes the sentence that much more ridiculous.
It's a figure of speech and perfectly legitimate, IMHO.
Seems silly to use a word in a sense opposite what it literally means for emphasis. But whatever you enjoy.
For example a harddisk with a terabyte capacity does not have space for 2^30=1,099,511,627,776 bytes but about 10% less. Some disk management tools however were based on base 2 measurements, and the customer might cry foul because the tool reported only about 930 gigabytes, err gibibytes.
For example, "Get a free widget with this 12 month magazine subscription ($12.99/month)!" And then people will genuinely argue that the widget is "free" in spite of it being tied to $150+ in mandatory expenditure.
The word people are looking for is included, the widget is INCLUDED with a 12 month/$12.99/month subscription, there's nothing "free" about it.
Nothing about the above is contrived either, these "free" ads and claims are all around us.
Oracle threatens to sue people who use the word "Java" without paying them.
GNU would very much like you to use "GNU" to recognize the contributions of GNU software in providing a usable operating system around the Linux kernel.
How exactly does one remind you of the other?
I'm not going to call it EcmaScript.
I'm not going to call it GNU / Linux.
Only standards bodies think it's a good idea to come up with a new version of the word "version" for each major new version.
v1 = DSTU1, v2 = DSTU2, v3 = STU3, v4 = R4
I'm hoping that they call the next one "V5", just for fun.
Most people are using ES6 as the name anyways - you don't hear "ES6 JavaScript" but only "ES6".
Don't we have enough change and confusion in the *Script world without also trying to change the name? I just don't understand what the value would be.
EcmaScript has never caught on, for a number of reasons, some mentioned in earlier comments.
Originally it was called Mocha and went through a series of name changes and branding before Netscape acquired a trademark license from Sun Microsystem and settled on Javascript.
> JavaScript was created in May 1995 by Brendan Eich while at Netscape, reportedly in only 10 days. It was originally named Mocha, a name chosen by Netscape founder Marc Andreessen, but was renamed four months later to LiveScript. At that time, Sun Microsystems owned the trademark for JavaScript. Netscape acquired a trademark license and renamed LiveScript to JavaScript in December 1995. It was somewhat of a marketing maneuver since Java was really popular at the time. The languages are not related at all.
Source: http://www.benmvp.com/learning-es6-history-of-ecmascript/
That's interesting... did not know. When I saw the title, I thought Ecma could use a coffee play on words[0]. Seeing Mocha, later renamed to Java, seems to partially confirm that there's a coffee backstory somewhere.