dean at deanlandolt.com
Tue Sep 13 09:10:58 PDT 2011
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 12:03 PM, John J Barton <johnjbarton at johnjbarton.com
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 12:26 AM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com>
> > On Sep 12, 2011, at 12:22 PM, John J Barton wrote:
> >> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 12:00 PM, <es-discuss-request at mozilla.org>
> >> Some of the discussion on this thread amounts to "IDEs work great for
> >> typed languages so let's make JS typed". What if we started with
> >> waste a lot of time talking about static analysis. It's the wrong
> >> tool.
> > Why are you assuming that conclusion already? Why not answer your own
> includes type inference, great?
> I'm assuming that conclusion already because the current tools for JS
> development are so incredibly lame that wasting time on static
> analysis -- which we know does not work without changing the language
> -- defies common sense.
I think you may be a little confused. Type "inference" means inferring types
without annotations. Thus, it can be done without changing the language and
can be useful for vm implementers and tool developers alike. Today. Sounds
pretty common-sensical to me.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the es-discuss