Microsoft tried this with ActiveX. Deja-vu, all over again. http://technologizer.com/2010/09/16/the-unwelcome-return-of-...
In Google's words: "The goal of the Dash (Dart) effort is ultimately to replace JavaScript as the lingua franca of Web development on the open Web platform"
I will never support Google's walled garden. Dart is a pathogen.
This is a genuine attempt to make the web better - I'm definitely supporting it.
Better for Google that is.
When the web has more interesting content being produced by more motivated developers, users win. When the web starts up faster, users and vendors win. When pages and apps run much quickly on the web, users and vendors win.
And Netscape (Mozilla's grandaddy) tried it with Javascript.
You know, the then proprietary to their browser technology that we now use as a standard. What "works best in X" can eventually be an adopted standard given time.
That said, your analogy is also flawed in another way. Active X was faulty technologically (insecure), proprietary and closed source.
Dart is better than JS architecturally, is open source, AND is passing through a standards body for standardization.
So no relation to Active X at all.
> You know, the then proprietary to their browser technology that we now use as a standard. What "works best in X" can eventually be an adopted standard given time.
While true, everyone agrees that was the wrong way to go and suggesting that we repeat that mistake is... a mistake.
NaCl is the second coming of ActiveX.
I will only touch Dart when it is natively supported in major browsers or required by our customers.
- customers request JavaScript written by humans, not tools. As it makes them easier to get "resources"
- source maps are only an option on a few desktop browsers, no fun testing generated JavaScript on specific browser issues