<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Brendan Eich on JavaScript 2</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/</link>
	<description>music, technology, interfaces</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Jan 2012 05:22:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Wonders for Oyarsa</title>
		<link>http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/comment-page-1/#comment-4191</link>
		<dc:creator>Wonders for Oyarsa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Oct 2006 20:45:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/#comment-4191</guid>
		<description>Operator overloading is a Godsend for things like Vector and Matrix math.  I don&#039;t suppose there is a way of curbing the abuses?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Operator overloading is a Godsend for things like Vector and Matrix math.  I don&#8217;t suppose there is a way of curbing the abuses?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sho</title>
		<link>http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/comment-page-1/#comment-2209</link>
		<dc:creator>sho</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2006 16:51:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/#comment-2209</guid>
		<description>Great comments, John. Fortunately, I think you and Till may actually agree, since I think he was referring to operator overloading, not method overloading. 

Operator overloading lets you redefine operators like &#039;+&#039; and &#039;=&#039;. In some cases, it can really help, but on the whole, it has some potential for abuse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great comments, John. Fortunately, I think you and Till may actually agree, since I think he was referring to operator overloading, not method overloading. </p>
<p>Operator overloading lets you redefine operators like &#8216;+&#8217; and &#8216;=&#8217;. In some cases, it can really help, but on the whole, it has some potential for abuse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John C. Bland II</title>
		<link>http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/comment-page-1/#comment-2207</link>
		<dc:creator>John C. Bland II</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Jul 2006 22:54:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/#comment-2207</guid>
		<description>Sho, I know this is a late comment but Till makes me want to respond. :-) 

Overloading is a def need. I really desired it in AS 3 but, as we know, it isn&#039;t there. In C#, overloading makes code soooo much better. Instead of writing a method and running through the arguments array to see what was passed in you can write multiple methods with different arguments for each scenario. This works GREAT for constructors (c# code here):

        public Table(string name, string schema, List columns)
        {
            this._name = name;
            this._schema = schema;
			this._columns = columns;
        }
        
        public Table(string name, string schema, bool hasView, List columns, List viewColumns) : this(name, schema, columns)
        {
            this._hasView = hasView;
            this._viewColumns = viewColumns;
        }

That kind of stuff would make AS 4 super sweet. Another thing I&#039;d love to see is something like this (sample AS code):

public function blah(myvar:String[]){

}

This way we expect a string of arrays in myvar vs the need to create a custom type.

Anyways, I haven&#039;t dove head-first into AS 3 but I will def&#039; say it is growing up right before our eyes. :-)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sho, I know this is a late comment but Till makes me want to respond. :-) </p>
<p>Overloading is a def need. I really desired it in AS 3 but, as we know, it isn&#8217;t there. In C#, overloading makes code soooo much better. Instead of writing a method and running through the arguments array to see what was passed in you can write multiple methods with different arguments for each scenario. This works GREAT for constructors (c# code here):</p>
<p>        public Table(string name, string schema, List columns)<br />
        {<br />
            this._name = name;<br />
            this._schema = schema;<br />
			this._columns = columns;<br />
        }</p>
<p>        public Table(string name, string schema, bool hasView, List columns, List viewColumns) : this(name, schema, columns)<br />
        {<br />
            this._hasView = hasView;<br />
            this._viewColumns = viewColumns;<br />
        }</p>
<p>That kind of stuff would make AS 4 super sweet. Another thing I&#8217;d love to see is something like this (sample AS code):</p>
<p>public function blah(myvar:String[]){</p>
<p>}</p>
<p>This way we expect a string of arrays in myvar vs the need to create a custom type.</p>
<p>Anyways, I haven&#8217;t dove head-first into AS 3 but I will def&#8217; say it is growing up right before our eyes. :-)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sho</title>
		<link>http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/comment-page-1/#comment-526</link>
		<dc:creator>sho</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 May 2006 00:16:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/#comment-526</guid>
		<description>Cool, Nicolas. I haven&#039;t played around with haXe yet (how do you prounounce this?) but I am familiar with MTASC, which is great work. I&#039;m looking forward to seeing how haXe evolves.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cool, Nicolas. I haven&#8217;t played around with haXe yet (how do you prounounce this?) but I am familiar with MTASC, which is great work. I&#8217;m looking forward to seeing how haXe evolves.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nicolas</title>
		<link>http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/comment-page-1/#comment-505</link>
		<dc:creator>Nicolas</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 May 2006 12:24:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/#comment-505</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m gonna do a shameless plug :) 
The haXe language already has Generics and Structural types (signatures). But also Enums (variants) and type inference. It target the Flash Player 6 7 8 and soon 9, but can also be used to write Javascript/AJAX applications and Server side with database access. haXe.org to visit the website ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m gonna do a shameless plug :)<br />
The haXe language already has Generics and Structural types (signatures). But also Enums (variants) and type inference. It target the Flash Player 6 7 8 and soon 9, but can also be used to write Javascript/AJAX applications and Server side with database access. haXe.org to visit the website ;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sho</title>
		<link>http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/comment-page-1/#comment-488</link>
		<dc:creator>sho</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 16:58:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/#comment-488</guid>
		<description>One more question... What&#039;s your interest in structural types? How would you imagine using it?

Thanks!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One more question&#8230; What&#8217;s your interest in structural types? How would you imagine using it?</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sho</title>
		<link>http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/comment-page-1/#comment-487</link>
		<dc:creator>Sho</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 16:48:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/#comment-487</guid>
		<description>Good picks, Till!

I actually misread Brendan&#039;s slides, and I mistook one of his examples of the let block syntax to be something like lambda expressions or Ruby&#039;s block syntax. Upon re-reading it, I wonder if it wouldn&#039;t just be better to redefine the behavior of var and deal with backward compatibility through a flag. Yield and generics are still exciting to me.

Nullable (and non-nullable) types are interesting to me, but I haven&#039;t fully thought through the implications. When would I want a nullable number?

Decimals are a clear win.

Array comprehensions would be more interesting to me if they were lazy evaluated (like list comprehensions).

Operator overloading is great and scary at the same time.

Thanks for the input!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good picks, Till!</p>
<p>I actually misread Brendan&#8217;s slides, and I mistook one of his examples of the let block syntax to be something like lambda expressions or Ruby&#8217;s block syntax. Upon re-reading it, I wonder if it wouldn&#8217;t just be better to redefine the behavior of var and deal with backward compatibility through a flag. Yield and generics are still exciting to me.</p>
<p>Nullable (and non-nullable) types are interesting to me, but I haven&#8217;t fully thought through the implications. When would I want a nullable number?</p>
<p>Decimals are a clear win.</p>
<p>Array comprehensions would be more interesting to me if they were lazy evaluated (like list comprehensions).</p>
<p>Operator overloading is great and scary at the same time.</p>
<p>Thanks for the input!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Till Schneidereit</title>
		<link>http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/comment-page-1/#comment-486</link>
		<dc:creator>Till Schneidereit</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 May 2006 11:24:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/#comment-486</guid>
		<description>Hi Sho,

Although the enhancements you mention are really exciting, I&#039;d consider the following ones more important:
- Structural types
- Nullable types
- Decimal type and the associated math

Also, the following enhancements make for really nice syntactic sugar:
- Array comprehensions
- Operator overloading</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Sho,</p>
<p>Although the enhancements you mention are really exciting, I&#8217;d consider the following ones more important:<br />
- Structural types<br />
- Nullable types<br />
- Decimal type and the associated math</p>
<p>Also, the following enhancements make for really nice syntactic sugar:<br />
- Array comprehensions<br />
- Operator overloading</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sho</title>
		<link>http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/comment-page-1/#comment-485</link>
		<dc:creator>sho</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 May 2006 19:09:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/#comment-485</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s right. When folks from Mozilla say &quot;JavaScript 2&quot;, they mean &quot;the new version of the language we are going to put into the browser which is based on ECMAScript Edition 4&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That&#8217;s right. When folks from Mozilla say &#8220;JavaScript 2&#8243;, they mean &#8220;the new version of the language we are going to put into the browser which is based on ECMAScript Edition 4&#8243;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Dowdell</title>
		<link>http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/comment-page-1/#comment-484</link>
		<dc:creator>John Dowdell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 May 2006 18:58:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kuwamoto.org/2006/05/17/brendan-eich-on-javascript-2/#comment-484</guid>
		<description>Thanks, Sho. I had been curious about that phrase &quot;JavaScript 2&quot;... is that a Mozilla brandname, with the actual reference spec being ECMAScript 4? The top search hit I found for the phrase was a 2003 document which sounded somewhat different: http://www.mozilla.org/js/language/js20/ 

tx, jd</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Sho. I had been curious about that phrase &#8220;JavaScript 2&#8243;&#8230; is that a Mozilla brandname, with the actual reference spec being ECMAScript 4? The top search hit I found for the phrase was a 2003 document which sounded somewhat different: <a href="http://www.mozilla.org/js/language/js20/" rel="nofollow">http://www.mozilla.org/js/language/js20/</a> </p>
<p>tx, jd</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

