Discuss

Discuss.

why?

typescript fixes that. nothing to discuss

You don't need autismquotes around object keys.
{
used_cars: "n/a",
cannabis: 16,
rocks: 27.3
}

is fine. Though you should probably be using a stricter number formatting framework, which would be more similar to that exact data structure you have in C++.

>fixing things by making them even more needlessly complex

no. it gives you optional type annotations. you aren't forced to use them, but I don't see why you wouldn't.

So did Dart, and look how well that caught on
The people who use JavaScript don't know why this is a problem, and they just see refined JavaScript frameworks that implement strong typing and OOP concepts and say "WHY WOULD WE WANT TO DO ALL THAT EXTRA WORK WHEN VANILLA JAVASCRIPT YOU JUST WRITE IT AND IT HAPPENS XDD"

dart isn't a drop-in replacement. this makes a huge difference. and the adoption of typescript is bretty good: vscode, github desktop, angular, ionic, rxjs, mobx

The real difference between C++ and javascript is the separation of data and code.
JS just throws this out the window by introducing closures, which encourages generating throwaway functions with data embedded within them just for one time use.

This is absolutely disgusting from a systems programming perspective.

>compiling to javascript

C++ requires knowledge of the data to work with beforehand, anything else requires jumping through massive hoops.
JS can work with arbitrary data easily and natively. Throw all that JSON into an object and address it like a native object without prior knowledge of its contents.

json objects are literally javascript arrays in plaintext form, it's no different from feeding a C++ program with a packed struct binary dump.

>the adoption of typescript is bretty good
>proceeds to list a bunch of desktop applications and backend shit javascript was never intended for
You've only convinced me it's just spreading the disease instead of curing it

you have to transpile js to js anyway unless you want to be stuck with a retarded, ancient version of the language.
keep in mind that this is all temporary. in 10 years we'll be able to skip js completely and compile everything to wasm which won't be much different from compiling to machine code today.

user pls
>In December 1995, soon after releasing JavaScript for browsers, Netscape introduced an implementation of the language for server-side scripting with Netscape Enterprise Server.[18]

Why do people defend javascript?

>you have to transpile js to js
Babel zombie located

Plz stop ruining everything

Signed, everyone else

data types shouldve died out in the 80s. they're ok for old programming techniques like in C but they are just harmful for object oriented or functional

Because they don't want to learn a real language.

Web Assembly will be the end of it all. Every singe website delivering binaries; I can barely imagine the horror.
We'll have to use a burner machine just to browse the web.

Name one real life problem functional programming solves that isn't already solved 10 times more efficiently with imperative techniques

>websites shipping bitcoin miners
>blocking bitcoin miners will be the new adblocking
>HEY DONT BLOCK MY MINER YOU'RE TAKING FOOD FROM MY MOUTH

Static/dynamic and weak/strong are two different axes.
Most functional languages I know of are still strongly typed.

The opposite will happen user. Computers will be nothing but shells on which you run a browser. You will boot into a browser, not a login screen. The power button on your PC will close the currently active browser. And thanks to mobile phones every single webpage will want to be a fullscreen web app, some will even automatically put themselves in fullscreen assuming everyone is just using a phone anyway.

The future is bright.

what am I ruining exactly?

>Web Assembly will be the end of it all. Every singe website delivering binaries; I can barely imagine the horror.
unlike the binaries that are running on your desktop right now?

>what am I ruining exactly?
Sanity of everyone not following your silly dogmas

what are my dogmas? you're free to develop your software however you want

>transpiling
>you have to transpile js to js anyway unless you want to be stuck with a retarded, ancient version of the language.
>keep in mind that this is all temporary. in 10 years we'll be able to skip js completely and compile everything to wasm which won't be much different from compiling to machine code today.

If you trying to convey that JS might be shit but the browser environment aren't: No, browsers also are a shit environment.

see

I make the decision to only run Free Software wherever possible for the sake of my own freedom and that of others. Even if this were not the case and the source could not be accessed, a user can make reasonably informed decisions about which programmes they choose to execute.

I highly doubt users are going to be prompted for every web assembly binary that wishes to execute, more likely it will be like JS today, where it's run automatically upon visiting a page. However, there can be no script blocking if it's impossible to asses what each binary does. The most we can hope for is some way to restrict those not distributed under a free licence, but the web today is pretty much unbrowsable if you enforce libreJS, so that's not a great solution.

>see
what is to see there? all you're doing is throwing some autistic phrases and non-arguments

I'm not even 60804885 but transpiling is always autastic.

>if you see this kind of type
Just name your structs irrelevant words, like "faggot."

>transpiling is always autastic
what a great way of saying absolutely nothing

Why do old people defend c++ if it's so strict that even your small penis can't fuck it?

inferiority complex
>HOW DARE THEM HIPSTER LOSERS ENTER MUH SICRET PROGRAMMING CLUB WHEN THEY CAN'T EVEN WRITE AN ULTRA-FAST FIZZBUZZ IN MY HARDCORE OVERLY-COMPLEX-FOR-MOST-USES LANGUAGE

C++ is an absolutely different technology serving different purposes than Javascript. What's the point in comparing them, because of the C family syntax?

But why? What is disgusting from a systems programming perspective. I bet you can't even justify this argument.

>web programmer's face when tasked to do systems programming

This is bullshit, I program JavaScript for work and I program c + assembly for my toy bootloader / os at home. I wouldn't want to switch languages for each task cos c + assembly would be stupid for web development and JavaScript would be useless for system development. Each has its place though.

>21
>old
JS Retard.

>your face when tasked to do systems programming
There is no face because this will not happen in your lifetime.

He's a Brit.

closures are great for assigning functionality to GUI objects

I think my computer is broken.
I can't unhilihgt your picture.
Sup Forums, can you tech support me plz?

I bet this is because Gnus got in my Linux.

I don't even

I guess there's a reason why javasript pays so well

>I'm born old and I defend old languages bc they will rule forever. Btw I love assembly because fuck me, I love to jump and store variables in register manually, muh speed

What is JSON.

>I love to jump and store variables in register manually
You're right, I do.