IDE support?

Brendan Eich brendan at
Tue Sep 13 10:56:36 PDT 2011

On Sep 13, 2011, at 9:03 AM, John J Barton wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 12:26 AM, Brendan Eich <brendan at> wrote:
>> 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> wrote:
>>> 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
>>> "What would be great for JavaScript developers"? Then we would not
>>> 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 question "What would be great for JavaScript developers?" and if the answer 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

Ok, your assumed conclusion rests on a prior assumption: 

> static analysis ... we know does not work without changing the language


It seems to me you have not studied either, which is nodejs based, the code is on github (it's all JS, essentially a fork of narcissus via Patrick Walton's jsctags):

or Brian Hackett's work in SpiderMonkey (Patrick Walton made a JS version of it, should be easier to study:

Really, asserting an assumption to back up an assumed conclusion?


More information about the es-discuss mailing list