Subj : Re: ECMAScript standards committee
To   : netscape.public.mozilla.jseng
From : =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Georg_Maa=DF?=
Date : Sat Oct 16 2004 09:08 pm

Brendan Eich wrote:
> JS is used extensively by beginners.
> It must be easy to use well for 
> that audience, no matter how it evolves.  Just adding power features 
> without considering how they will be abused by beginners is foolish.

Then give JS 2.0 only to the experts who know what they want and how to 
use and reduce JS 1.5 back to the limited features of 1.0 to not 
overstrain the beginners.

Neither Java nor C# give us the flexibility of JavaScript because they 
are static only. But they give us the a more clear source code, where 
static stuff only fits.

But there are enough situations, where we must deal with a mixture of 
static and dynamic stuff. JavaScript 2.0 will focus on this by adding 
also static features. This suppprt for static stuff is not as rich and 
easy as in C# but better than nothing. JavaScript 2.0 will give us an 
additional value. When it is available it will evolve and get better and 
better and better.

Also "backporting" some JS 2.0 features to 1.x may be useful as sketched 
by you in thread "Future of JS?"

 > Of particular importance are namespaces and versioning, so that
 > different scripts or modules (scripts loaded into document containers)
 > can present abstraction barriers bearing explicit type information and
 > qualified names, which form contracts that can be maintained across
 > multiple concurrent implementations, and of course across serial
 > re-implementation.

Greetings, Georg
-- 
Georg Maaß   -   bioshop.de    D-76227 Karlsruhe, Westmarkstraße 82
HTML, XML / JavaScript, C++, Java, PHP, VB / CGI, JSP, ASP, ASP.net
   - The ultimate DHTML engine: http://gml-modul.sourceforge.net -
                       http://sourceforge.net/projects/gml-modul

.