Optional Strong Typing

J B port25 at gmail.com
Fri Aug 23 11:00:57 PDT 2013


Are you referring to browsers like Chrome that compile the JS first? Then,
yeah, I mean it shouldn't throw an error at compile time.


On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Jeremy Martin <jmar777 at gmail.com> wrote:

> > var foo:String;
>
> That's already a compile-time error (as opposed to runtime.... not sure if
> that's what you meant by the interpreter throwing an error).
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 1:56 PM, J B <port25 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> And just to be clear, I'm not asking for run-time type checking or
>> coercion; I'm simply asking that the interpreter not to thrown an error
>> when it encounters something like this: var foo:String;
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 12:45 PM, J B <port25 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> For one, I wouldn't describe strong typing as a "pet feature". Two, no,
>>> as far as I know, most of those languages in that list don't offer macros
>>> or lots of parentheses; and, if they did, then, yeah, maybe it does say
>>> something.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Domenic Denicola <
>>> domenic at domenicdenicola.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In general ECMAScript lacks lots of features. You may well ask why it
>>>> doesn't have any other pet feature, and you can often point to
>>>> compile-to-JS languages that add those. This doesn't imply that the feature
>>>> should be added to the language.
>>>>
>>>> Here, let me try:
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> I'm aware of LispyScript, as well as all of these:
>>>> https://github.com/jashkenas/coffee-script/wiki/List-of-languages-that-compile-to-JS
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> But those languages appear to have been created precisely because
>>>> ECMAScript lacks features like lots of parentheses or macros. How many of
>>>> those languages offer lots of parentheses? I count quite a few... Doesn't
>>>> that say something?
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> The existence of a feature in other languages does not imply it should
>>>> be added to ECMAScript. You'll have to justify better than that why you
>>>> think strong typing would be valuable to a language that has historically
>>>> rejected it. (I'll wait for one of the old timers to chime in about the ES4
>>>> days here.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> es-discuss mailing list
>> es-discuss at mozilla.org
>> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Jeremy Martin
> 661.312.3853
> http://devsmash.com
> @jmar777
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20130823/238cdb5e/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list