dhtmlkitchen at gmail.com
Wed May 11 07:40:27 PDT 2011
On 5/10/11, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com> wrote:
> On May 10, 2011, at 4:53 PM, Douglas Crockford wrote:
>> I look at ECMAScript as serving four groups:
>> 1. The beginners for whom the language was designed.
>> 2. The web developers who owe their livelihoods to the language.
>> 3. The scientists who will use the language for greatness.
Not much greatness in web development these days, is there?
>> 4. Language designers and critics.
I'm fine with calling these traits; calling them mutually exclusive
categories is a thinking error.
> I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "scientists". The third group I would
> identify are professional software developers who will use the language to
> implemented complex applications of the soft that today are more commonly
> implemented using Java, C++, etc. These are larger systems that need more
> emphasis upon upon abstraction building in order to manage the domain and
> application complexity.
> At a meeting today, the dichotomy we used in talking about this is the
> difference between "imperative programmers" and "abstraction builders".
> Imperative programmer know how to use basic imperative statements to
> manipulate predefined abstractions. Abstraction builders create such
> abstractions. I think that all of your #1 and much of #2 are "imperative
> programmers". While we need to continue to improve the language for this
> group we also need to start better serving the needs of the abstraction
> builders. Much of what we have promoted to proposal status seems to be
> oriented target on this latter group.
The mentality that "imperative programmers" and "abstraction builders"
are non-overlapping is a thinking error that pissed me off to the end
Abstractions aren't to be done by the ivory tower architect (or "js
The need comes from fulfilling the requirements. I recommend Domain
Driven Design, by Eric Evans (and I have a copy for sale, in excellent
Please don't design Ecmascript based on categorizational false dichotomies.
More information about the es-discuss