How can other languages even compete?
it's the ramen of languages.
sure it's easy to make and get's the job done.
but at the end of the day, you know it's not real food.
>>51958012
stupid analogy, but I'll keep the "it's easy to make and get's the job done".
period.
>>51957907
There are no other languages available for client side programming, not that it matters really because real calculations are done server side. I had a Lecturer who told me he only browser the web with JS off, kinda nice to listen to him talk but really nerdy.
>>51957907
I overheard someone say they were using it for their bakend.
What the fuck.
>>51957907
>a single fucking thread
>>51957907
>JavaScript
>>51958749
why would you need more than one thread for a program? it makes no sense. you need more than one thread? make more than one script doofus.
>>51958729
It was used for backend in netscape server back in 90's.
Then you could write in js(or vbscript) on classic asp.
So it's not something new.
>>51957907
by making javascipt their compile-to target?
>>51958825
https://hacks.mozilla.org/2015/12/compiling-to-webassembly-its-happening/
https://kripken.github.io/talks/wasm.html#/
Webassembly coming soon. js could be thrown out then.
>>51958041
>>51958012
>>51958113
Wut is node.js?
Oh yes, Javascript, a language so fun to develop with that there are over 100 languages to compile to it precisely so no one has to use it.
https://github.com/jashkenas/coffeescript/wiki/List-of-languages-that-compile-to-JS
>>51958794
Shared memory. You have two procedures running in parallel, and you want them to be able to send messages back and forth to each other. This may be particularly important if both tasks need to share an open file or socket descriptor.
>>51958944
You need threads for some number crunching-like tasks but it's not the purpose of scriping languages.
Most likely your tasks would be IO-bought so async approach works better.
>>51957907
Rich Hickey says relax
>>51958906
A meme, fampai
By being non-shit.
>>51959413
See also https://github.com/purescript/purescript
function level scoping is straight up retarded
>>51959494
>function level scoping is straight up retarded
I don't see it as a problem. The way closures are implemented is a problem, saving everything in context is stupid.
