IDE support?

Brendan Eich brendan at
Tue Sep 13 15:00:33 PDT 2011

On Sep 13, 2011, at 12:26 AM, Brendan Eich 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?

John and I corresponded privately and we agreed that static is less than static+dynamic. That is something I tend to ass-ume, being an implementor (SpiderMonkey does analysis when compiling, and of course lots of runtime feedback-based code generation).

So, static+dynamic. The static side has some powerful algorithms to bring to bear. Dynamic is necessary due to eval and kin, and gives strictly more information (and more relevant information!).


More information about the es-discuss mailing list