Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google To Introduce New Programming Language — Dart

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the get-off-my-lawn-dart dept.

Programming 250

An anonymous reader sends this excerpt from El Reg: "Google has built a brand-new programming language for 'structured web programming,' one that appears to be suited to browser-based apps. Two of the search giant's engineers will discuss Dart, Google's new language, at the Goto international software development conference next month. News of the new language was posted to the Goto website. There aren't yet any technical details on Dart but the bios of the two Googlers presenting at Goto strongly suggest a bent towards programming for the web and browser."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Great, another fucking language to learn (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#37351968)

What's that make now, over two dozen different languages for web development, with ludicrous levels of overlap? Great, now things can get even MORE complicated. And, of course, MS and Apple won't adopt it--making it real useful, just as long as all your visitors happen to be using Chrome or some future version of Firefox.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (2)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352026)

Hey, this could finally be the web language that isn't a kludge or poorly designed. Those other 22 could all go away.

Trouble is, we don't know - this article is a worthless waste of time until it's actually released or detailed.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (5, Funny)

knuthin (2255242) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352064)

Those other 22 could all go away.

https://www.xkcd.com/927/ [xkcd.com]
You think?

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352118)

Cool. It's a computing-related story. I was wondering when the XKCD niggers would show up. Just like clockwork, there you are.

Maybe we can wait for a story about lasers and talk about putting them on sharks' heads too. That'd be novel as hell.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352286)

wow someone pissed in your cornflakes this morning...

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352350)

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352822)

HAHAH!!! That xkcd get's them every time.

*wipes tear from eye*

wooohoo!

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352094)

With Google's constant closing of old projects, I'm not going to touch it. Google needs to learn to commit to its projects and not just put them out just to forget about them in a few months.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352432)

You mean like this one?
http://www.python.org/

Ok, I know they didn't invent it, but they do now employ Guido and use it extensively enough inhouse they're always going to want to support it.

With any luck Dart'll be popular enough inhouse that they won't want to or be able to shut it down because of how many things use it.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (2)

hedronist (233240) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352864)

Python is not a good example to make this point. Google did not start the Python project, and Python has lots of uses that have nothing to do with Google. If Google were to fold tomorrow, Python (and Guido) would survive just fine.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (2)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352906)

Not to mention the fact that Google has migrated a lot of their internal code away from Python over the last few years...

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (2)

Fujisawa Sensei (207127) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352944)

We already have a language like that, its called 'C'.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352074)

Reminds me of this: http://xkcd.com/927/

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (3, Interesting)

bonch (38532) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352174)

This is what happens when a tech company gets too big and doesn't know what to focus on. Just like Microsoft used to do, they're releasing pet project after pet project after project, hoping one of them sticks.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (4, Insightful)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352344)

I thought Google have been doing this the whole time, ie 20% projects. Nothing wrong with releasing the ones that come to fruition. It's not detracting from other parts of their business, and it's bringing cool stuff into the community - some of which might be really useful. Google are one of the companies that actually has a chance of making a replacement to JS "stick", though convincing MS would be a very tall order indeed.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352732)

Google has been doing this ever since Google Search.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (1, Troll)

hcs_$reboot (1536101) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352484)

And, of course, MS and Apple won't adopt it

If the Dart language is intended to replace something like the buggy, slow and badly designed PHP language, I'm likely to give it a try.
In other terms, if Dart is to PHP what Chrome is to Firefox, that new language sounds promising.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (1)

VGPowerlord (621254) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352594)

If the Dart language is intended to replace something like the buggy, slow and badly designed PHP language,

I was rather hoping it was intended to replace the buggy, slow (although progress has been made), and badly designed ECMAScript language, which you may also know as JavaScript.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (1)

rmstar (114746) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353166)

If the Dart language is intended to replace something like the buggy, slow and badly designed PHP language, I'm likely to give it a try.

Well, it is not as if there weren't any alternatives before.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37353200)

Wow, I wouldn't compare Firefox to PHP. PHP is a hot circle of garbage; Firefox may be slower than Chrome and not be as advanced, but it did a lot more for the web than PHP. Tools like Firebug and all of the other awesome extensions gave a lot to the design of Chrome.

IE is more akin to PHP.

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (1)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352678)

I can fuck in all languages !

Re:Great, another fucking language to learn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37353140)

What are you actually complaining about?

If it's the same as all other languages, it'll die.
If it's worse, it'll die.
If it's better, it's worth learning and adopting, and other technologies will be replaced.

Rather than moaning about the world in your comfy sofa, how about getting up and have a sense of curiosity, damn it.

please please please (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352030)

tell me that this will replace Javascript.

If it does PHP too that would be a bonus.

Granted I don't know if this will actually be any better -- and given Google's reported hostility to good programming languages I'd need some good experience with it to decide -- but God knows it can't be any worse.

Re:please please please (1)

John Courtland (585609) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352066)

Can you discuss why you don't like JS? I personally like JS (coffeescript more so), and would like to hear your thoughts on the language.

Re:please please please (3, Insightful)

Bill_the_Engineer (772575) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352232)

Because not liking JS makes you look cool?

I take the Stephen Stills' approach to programming language: If you can't be with your dream programming language, just use the one you're with. :)

Re:please please please (1)

ArhcAngel (247594) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352268)

Can you discuss why you feel the need to ask an AC to elaborate or why you would "like" hearing the thoughts of an AC on something?

Re:please please please (1)

John Courtland (585609) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352614)

Cause I like javascript and I wanna hear why others don't?

Re:please please please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37353264)

Here's a good discussion: Javascript is well and truly the poor man's 'programming' language, scripted by legions of feckless web developers who wouldn't know a line of assembler, a cache miss, data orientated programming, a GPU or even the most basic concept of mathematics if it hit them in their out of scope or maybe not face. Instead, they choose - either through stupidity or ignorance, to create useless web 'apps' and join the crowd of retards headed by Google and the like who believe that barfing everything up into The Cloud is the right way to go about things. There is nothing fast about Javascript, it's lack of typing is unfathomable and trying to debug it is a complete and utter nightmare. Yet, inexplicably, it still exists, and people actually create extensions to it, and discuss ways of optimising scripts written in it. If Javascript were a car, it would be a Rover Metro complete with dump valves, spoiler and a 16 year old delinquent in track suit bottoms at the wheel.

Re:please please please (1)

MagikSlinger (259969) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352278)

I'm not AC, but I can opine about this. The Javascript language, not too much problem. Enclosures grabbing any variable in scope and keeping them around is a major pain. That's all. The API of Browsers: Oh, my complaints are legion, but that's not really about Javascript anymore than the Win32 API is about C/C++. I wonder if AC is complaining about the browser API and not the language?

Re:please please please (2)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352990)

A few things, off the top of my head:

  • Brace insertion.
  • Poor scoping rules.
  • Completely insane constructor semantics trying to look a bit like Java in a prototype-based language (new foo() calls foo() with this set to a new copy of foo.prototype. WTF?)
  • Lack of weak references (makes it really hard to write nontrivial code that doesn't leak)
  • Poor numerical support (everything is a double - no integer types)
  • Everything is an object... except that sometimes it isn't, although it pretends to be.
  • Arrays that look like dictionaries but aren't... except when they are (e.g. someArray[1] and someArray["foo"] do completely unrelated things)

There are probably other reasons to dislike JavaScript. Putting Self in a browser would have been a lot better than this crappy cut-down Self clone with Java syntax that we ended up with.

Re:please please please (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37353460)

I'm not the AC you're responding to but I'll gladly list some of the faults of Javascript:

  • Dynamic, weak typing sucks.
  • Automatic semi-colon insertion is both a stupid idea and implemented in a completely retarded way.
  • The scoping rules are bad.
  • It supports octal numeric literals in an incredibly error-prone way (080 is 80, 070 is 56).
  • The === operator is not ==.
  • It has both undefined and null.
  • You can redefine undefined.
  • No support for namespaces.

Re:please please please (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352134)

tell me that this will replace Javascript.

If it does PHP too that would be a bonus.

Granted I don't know if this will actually be any better -- and given Google's reported hostility to good programming languages I'd need some good experience with it to decide -- but God knows it can't be any worse.

Do you still do PHP... ? That's so 90s.

Do you listen to your cassette tape coding compilation? Ice.. Ice.. baby...!

Re:please please please (1)

Oligonicella (659917) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352670)

If PHP is passe, then why can you embed it in HTML code via Ice? What would be the point?

Re:please please please (2)

lynnae (2439544) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352194)

I got this link from my twitter feed, based on the assumption that Dart is Dash renamed.

http://markmail.org/message/uro3jtoitlmq6x7t [markmail.org]

So there's hope.

As for why one wouldn't be estatic over javascript, there are many good reasons in that email, many others in The Good Parts book.

There's always room for something better, while not denegrating the existing.

Standards (2, Interesting)

jaf1230 (696309) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352048)

http://xkcd.com/927/ [xkcd.com] Nuff said.

Re:Standards (1)

woboyle (1044168) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352162)

As one wag said, "The nice thing about standards, is that there are so many." and "The nice thing about standards, is that everyone has one."...

"There aren't yet any technical details on Dart" (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352056)

"There aren't yet any technical details on Dart"

Stopped reading there.

Re:"There aren't yet any technical details on Dart (2)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352084)

Pretty much. What's there to say? Until there are details, all we know is that Google has a language called Dart.

Re:"There aren't yet any technical details on Dart (1)

ZeroExistenZ (721849) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352204)

BUT ITS EXCITINGLY NEEEWW!!

Cynical geeks are so Millenial.

Re:"There aren't yet any technical details on Dart (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352522)

Pretty much. What's there to say? Until there are details, all we know is that Google has a language called Dart.

Well, it comes with a whole new model of software development. Basically, you throw darts on a dartboard with keywords and punctuation printed on it.

Re:"There aren't yet any technical details on Dart (3, Funny)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352530)

So it's a PHP derivative then.

Goto conference--awesome name... (1)

datajerk (63203) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352072)

Goto conference--awesome name for a programming conference. However, their logo: "goto;" is a bit confusing, where are we going? Perhaps I should be reading it as "goto conference;".

Re:Goto conference--awesome name... (1)

Rizimar (1986164) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352384)

What's worse is when I plug it into my GPS, there are so many intermediary stops and detours that the Goto map looks like a bunch of spaghetti!

Re:Goto conference--awesome name... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37353086)

"gosubs nested 20 deep conference" was taken

Go (2)

Idimmu Xul (204345) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352100)

Did anyone really start using the last language they used, Go [golang.org] ?

Re:Go (1)

Lexx Greatrex (1160847) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352246)

Shudder... Go was an epic fail.

Re:Go (1)

Lexx Greatrex (1160847) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352304)

Shudder... Go was an epic fail.

http://lexxical.universeii.com/2009/11/googles-new-language-go-please-stop.html [universeii.com] was the link I forgot to post.

Re:Go (1)

MimeticLie (1866406) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352740)

Your article was an epic fail. Who needs an well reasoned, well articulated argument when you can just repeat statements from Google verbatim and slap a "You Decide" title over them? I knew nothing about Go before reading it, and I know even less now. Well done.

Re:Go (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37353290)

It's hard to take those criticisms seriously when the author describes Java as dynamically typed. Java is pretty much the poster child for strongly/statically typed languages and owes its plethora of tooling to this fact.

Re:Go (1)

cababunga (1195153) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353382)

Exactly. I stopped reading right at that sentence.

Re:Go (1)

Karl J. Smith (184) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352370)

Yes. For example, Heroku is using it (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05/05/google_go/), and you can also use Google App Engine with Go - http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/go/overview.html [google.com]

Re:Go (1)

Oligonicella (659917) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352790)

So, we have a language developed for one, single person?

Re:Go (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37353416)

Google uses Go internally for a bunch of server-side stuff; they released it mostly for the hell of it.

Re:Go (1)

toxonix (1793960) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352528)

I don't think Go stuck to the wall they threw it at. Or else there was no wall, and it was thrown into the void. This is standard operating procedure at Google. Throw something at the wall (or a wall) and see if it sticks.

Re:Go (1)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353054)

I wanted to use it but I can't find any ssl library or examples for it. The language syntax is easy, I write python and C++, and it is distributed by nature. I got the impression it was Erlang for those that don't want to poke out their eyes reading their own code. Anyway, a language designed specifically for distributed applications without an ssl library, IMHO, is useless.

Another programming language? (3, Interesting)

Tei (520358) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352160)

A new programming language create a huge problem, before start solving anything. And its that you lose all the work done with libraries. Everything. A new language is like a natural disaster that wipe civilization to the caves again.

People is doing a lot of cool stuff with Javascript. JS is starting to becoming a decent enough language to write code for the web!.
http://jquerysbestfriends.com/#slide1 [jquerysbestfriends.com]

Re:Another programming language? (0)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352346)

So you wannabe coders keep saying, all of javascript is documented on google searches, its so easyyy to copy paste those functions and input your own field names and just seem them work. Trace tools for the browser make it even easier, they work for EVERYBODY since its client side. Wanna input your SSN into a jscript page while your browser is compromised with spyware? Identity theft would reach a whole new level then, hackers wouldn't even have to try, your only protection is your browser, not a corporate security team, I'm sure all of you can handle that no problem right (masters required min or 1337)?

Seriously stop pitching this band aid language as a solve all, it wasn't designed for, it isn't being designed to become such, nor are the security holes even meant be fixed, the language just isn't mean to work for anything serious and how long do you go on the web without logging into something or giving out other personal information?

Re:Another programming language? (1)

Tei (520358) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352812)

Javascript need not promoting. Is the standard language to write on the web, you can't use anything else even if you want.

What you could do, is write Javascript with Lips, C++ or VB styles. It will still be Javascript, but it can look like C++ or C or VB if you want to.

Life for webmasters used to be miserable, back then, with IE6 and Netscape 4.61.

Re:Another programming language? (1)

Oligonicella (659917) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352918)

"Seriously stop pitching this band aid language as a solve all, it wasn't designed for..."

That's what ya call a straw argument. No one claims it solves all. In fact, anyone claiming one language is a 'solves all' isn't thinking deeply enough.

But his point is good. There is an absolute shit-load of good quality JS code in libraries and it is not quite as simple as simply renaming stuff. A display can be reached using two incompatible approaches making the integration into your application code interesting to say the least.

Re:Another programming language? (4, Interesting)

jc42 (318812) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353090)

So you wannabe coders keep saying, all of javascript is documented on google searches, its so easy to copy paste those functions and input your own field names and just seem them work.

Well, I've lately been experimenting with HTML5 canvases, which involves a lot of JS, and I've found that it isn't always quite that easy. Yes, there are zillions of examples that do cute things in a canvas. But they all seem to be made up of lots of hard-coded numbers that aren't explained anywhere in any coherent fashion. So to use them to draw your figures, you spend long hours tweaking the numbers, trying to grok what the relation might be between the numbers and what appears on the screen.

Similarly, there's lots of online HTML5 docs on zillions of sites, but it all seems to involve "handwaving", i.e., it describes what's going on in a "10-km view" fashion, using lots of undefined terms. When you try googling those terms, you find that you're searching through millions of ghits that are mostly about totally unrelated topics that happen to use the same words (with different meanings).

So you try asking in a forum. And you find that there are zillions of HTML5 forums, each of which has maybe 2 or 5 messages per month, and the people (or person ;-) there are oh-so-friendly, but don't quite know how to answer your question. You try asking in multiple forums, and it takes forever, due to the fact that people don't like usenet any more; they prefer zillions of forums, each of which has its own GUI that takes days to learn to use effectively.

The "cargo cult" (google it) approach to web programming is widespread. But it can be a recipe for a very long, slow, drawn-out process of coming to some partial understanding of WTF is going on in the code that doesn't quite do what you need, and responds bizarrely to tiny tweaks. Getting downloaded code to do what you need done can take up a rather large chunk of your lifespan. And you are forever plagued by bugs due to your lack of understanding what it does in cases that you haven't tested.

The only way to produce code that actually works correctly is to understand (in every detail, to the bit level) all the things you're working with. Cut-and-paste sounds like a useful idea, but it's much of the reason for the widespread coding disasters that we're plagued with.

Learning to use "New! Improved!" Web tools has a history of being a lot like swimming in molasses. The intro examples look cool, but doing anything even slightly different from the examples tends to lead you down a maze of twisted passages, all alike. So there are reasons to be skeptical of this one, until we've seen some evidence of what it's like, and how much of a time sinkhole learning it will be.

Re:Another programming language? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352508)

My prediction is that this IS a JS server akin to Node. My guess is that it uses Google's V8 JS engine, just like Node. Why? Well, one of the engineers worked on V8 as well. Dart implies fast. V8 is fast. It kinda all fits together...

Re:Another programming language? (1)

Tei (520358) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352688)

Node.js is awesome.
Theres even something that work like apt-get to install new libraries and apps. Stuff like FilePad make me go :-OOOOOOOOO

Re:Another programming language? (1)

defaria (741527) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352612)

Not really. Languages have been known to have the ability to call libraries written in other languages. Have you not heard of this?!?

Re:Another programming language? (1)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353062)

Writing glue code is not much fun, though.

Re:Another programming language? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352858)

That was the most annoying website layout I've seen in a while, thanks for that

Re:Another programming language? (1)

kwerle (39371) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352892)

I'll take a language that has strong support for subclassing, thanks.

People are doing some cool stuff with javascript - but I think it's in spite of the language, not because of it.

(claimer: I have to deal with JS every day)

EMC? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352176)

DART huh... Wonder how EMC and their Data Access in Real Time (DART) software will feel about that.

Re:EMC? (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353300)

Who cares how their lawyers "feel" about a dictionary word that's marketing a structured programming language, not a software package, that no one in the market will be confused by? Nobody, except maybe some other lawyers looking for more gravy.

Grr pun prediction (-1)

rwa2 (4391) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352202)

Dammit, all of the java-esque names for things sound gay enough already. Now I'm pretty certain they're going to call their core structures "objet d'art"

Re:Grr pun prediction (-1, Troll)

doston (2372830) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352342)

Gay? Really, a$$hole?

Re:Grr pun prediction (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352624)

Gay? Really, a$$hole?

a$$hole? Really? That was pretty gay.

Re:Grr pun prediction (1)

glwtta (532858) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352562)

Hmm, judging from your uid, I'd estimate you're at least 24 years old, probably older. Which is depressing.

Re:Grr pun prediction (1)

Tr3vin (1220548) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353148)

He is actually only 14. Poor kid was raised by slashdot.

It may be older than dart, but... (3)

PSVMOrnot (885854) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352206)

It may be older than dart, but I think I'll stick with C. ;-)

Admittedly, most of my programming these days is number crunching rather than web apps.

It's called javascript (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352220)

last time I checked...

So what does this do different? (5, Insightful)

Evangelion (2145) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352256)

I'm kind of confused as to where google is going these days.

Is this just a side effect of hiring too many bored CS graduates -- put enough in a room together and they come up with their own languages?

I just can't see this being used outside of google -- Web Programming is largely a solved problem, and there are already a plethora of options. Since MS and Apple won't touch anything that comes out of Google, it'll only ever be relevant on the server side -- which is where there are already too many options.

Unless this does something radical -- and judging by what Go was, I doubt it -- this will probably be a niche thing they use internally.

Re:So what does this do different? (1)

decipher_saint (72686) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352386)

I recall reading that developers at Google are allowed to allocate something like 20% of their time to side projects, regardless of whether or not it's "useful" (because really you can't always predict when some widget, technique or acquired knowledge will come in handy.)

Dart may not be for anyone outside of Google (or inside for that matter), but it's there if and when you need it to do something. *shrug*

Re:So what does this do different? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352512)

this will probably be a niche thing they use internally, AND only release haphazard updates to the public that have little correlation to what they are using internally.

Re:So what does this do different? (3, Insightful)

yk4ever (1110821) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353156)

Web Programming is largely a solved problem, and there are already a plethora of options.

Business programming was largely a solved problem, you could choose between COBOL and Ada.

Even if the new language isn't used widely, its features might creep into existing ones and improve them (see MS Research, Haskell and C# 3.0+).

Simplicity is key (2)

trcollinson (1331857) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352318)

The problem with adding yet another language to the mix is engineers as a whole need to focus on simplicity and good standards and stay away from reinventing the wheel. Diluting the market with more languages to "make web development easier" or "help with web development performance" or even "fill the gaps of other languages" is ludicrous. The problem is most anything can be done very simply and effectively with the existing tools that are available, but really developers are always looking for the next language that's "easier to learn" or "fills my gap of boredom in my current language". We'd be far better off focusing on truly understanding and deep diving into the languages we have. If there are gaps or short comes (which inevitably there will be!) then we should work to fix those in the language, not reinvent the wheel again.

vs ASP.NET JSP? (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352388)

I have no idea why I would want to switch, this article is kinda meh. Go speculate some more.

For those in universities, picture how long it would take to adopt such a language.

For those with inhouse systems, wanna recode your app for google? :)

Any DART jobs listed yet? (3, Funny)

SpacePunk (17960) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352418)

10+ years experience needed, of course.

Re:Any DART jobs listed yet? (3, Insightful)

Bob the Super Hamste (1152367) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352762)

After being in the programming field for a while now it seems that often companies that post those kind of job listings are looking for a reason to hire H1-B people. They can now legitimately go and say the couldn't find an American worker with that experience since obviously the job requires it and then hire some cheap labor. The other case is that it is a HR issue since they are told to find a senior programmer with experience with technology X. Technology x may only have been around for 2 or 3 years, but the HR drone immediately thinks they need someone with 10+ years of experience with technology x and then filter you out because you don't have that experience. I had that problem when I graduated college and companies were looking for people with 10 years of java experience even though the language had only been around for 5 years or so at that time

Re:Any DART jobs listed yet? (1)

sacridias (2322944) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353436)

Solution: 10 Years experience with Java and other Object oriented languages.

Re:Any DART jobs listed yet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352800)

I remember interviewing for a job in '06 where "10+" years of experience in C#/.NET were required. I had been working with both since the public betas(we had a client who was, shall we say, 'excited' about the new platform), and was told I was out of consideration because I didn't have enough experience. Since I had other prospects and they'd self-selected out by that point anyway, I told them flatly that anyone who could meet that requirement was a liar, even if they worked for Microsoft. They laughed.

I often wonder if they're still laughing.

DoubleClick DART (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352468)

its got something to do with DoubleClick which Google Acquired.

Guess what? (1)

slashpot (11017) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352500)

I've got DART - (wait for it) - IN MY PANTS! lololol

Functional Version (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37352580)

In related news, a couple programmers from the Dart team have begun work on a functional version of Dart, called "Fart".

Re:Functional Version (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352646)

In related news, a couple programmers from the Dart team have begun work on a functional version of Dart, called "Fart".

That's nothing compared to the logic programming version of it: Lart.

lets jump on a Google Wave and discuss it! (2)

citizenr (871508) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352728)

oh wait ...

Programming Languages (1)

wbtittle (456702) | more than 3 years ago | (#37352780)

Learning a new language doesn't take huge amounts of time. Watching the next wave of 'tools' come washing over the side that will make me more productive because it "just does it", makes me laugh. If all anyone does is what the next tool was designed to do, it just does it, but for some reason no one ever wants to stick just with what it does and suddenly I am figuring out how to twist the new tool to do what the inspired people want.

I suspect the real lesson I need to learn well is "Use programming to make your life easier, don't attempt to make a living programming".

Every time I hear a manager say "That's not hard to do is it?", you should be able to do that in a couple of minutes, I cringe.

Re:Programming Languages (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353002)

Every time I hear a manager say "That's not hard to do is it?", you should be able to do that in a couple of minutes, I cringe.

I believe we have the same boss.

language police (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37353012)

I hope this language is implemented in one of the four permitted languages at Google: C/C++, Java, Javascript, or Python.

Why so negative? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37353074)

People sure are negative about something that we have no details about. It's not like Javascript is so great that one can't imagine something a lot better taking over. It's right to be skeptical, and certainly there are entrenched interests to deal with. But if it's open source, then at least Mozilla and perhaps Apple would listen. I'm sure it would take longer to convince Microsoft.

But despite the improvements that HTML5 have brought, web apps are still clunky and a little unnatural to both use and develop compared to desktop apps, so we should appreciate attempts to improve things, or at least not dismiss them out of hand.

DART = EMC's OS (1)

Bardwick (696376) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353096)

Data Access in real Time. It's what run the NAS heads..

Why so negative? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37353134)

Only negative comments so far and absolutely nothing is known about this... This will probably go nowhere like most new languages but don't tell me e.g. JavaScript is perfect?

only 10 years away. (1)

jweller13 (1148823) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353160)

No worries. Fusion power is only 10 years away....as we've been hearing for the last 30 years.

And then (1)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353360)

abondon it six months later.

I was hoping Javafx would fill this role (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353478)

But it has fallen through cracks after the takeover.

I'll give it a chance (2)

gsgriffin (1195771) | more than 3 years ago | (#37353484)

With the frustration of working with so many different languages and some that only work when you load in a bunch of code (jQuery...awesome, but JS should do all this natively) or a framework, I'm very curious to see if Google is in fact focusing on web development and can provide a platform that allows for simplified coding without lots of browser overhead. Why do we think that languages should stop and never evolve or change or die? I for one don't want to still be coding 20 years from now with JS and PHP the way they are. Would love to have something that works hand in hand between server, db, and browser in a more seamless way. I'll wait to see before passing judgment.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?