| > I actually prefer vanilla javascript to ES6-7 ES6 is vanilla JavaScript. Most modern browsers have support >98% of added ES6 functionality for several major versions at this point. Admittedly, Node.js is still lacking, but it's getting there. > You still can't rely on bindings to stay put and new additions like the splat operator just don't work the same way all the time. Unless you have a bug to report about undefined or non-deterministic behavior, then it must be something you're doing. Random functionality is not intended behavior. > eventually the web development community will come around... and compile-to-js languages will find their place in the sun again. This is implying they were ever there. The big ones that come to mind were terrible. They would produce way more bloated frontends than anything we see today. In general, adding a layer of abstraction can be incredibly useful sometimes, but they can come at a steep cost. What you include in "compile-to-JS" does get a little tricky to define, though. Things like TypeScript or even Babel can kind of count here. I think we will likely continue to see these, but I seriously doubt we'll see a resurgence of anything like GWT again. > I suspect that people who actually like the language are experiencing a form of Stockholm Syndrome. Sure, but the same can be said for anybody working with computers ;) |
You wouldn't be saying that if you ran into the behavior we have. Eventually I'll do more digging to find out root cause. But there's no way it was us.
> I seriously doubt we'll see a resurgence of anything like GWT again.
I'm thinking more along the lines of CoffeeScript. It bifurcates the landscape even further, but honestly I don't think it can really get any worse than it is now. But at least it will be building on top of sanity and not the lava layer.