×

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 Releases Dart 1.1

timothy posted about 3 months ago | from the is-it-on-target dept.

Google 161

rjmarvin writes "Google released version 1.1 of its Dart open-source web programming language today, with new features and improved tools. The Dart Editor is updated with improved debugging, code implementation and more descriptive toolkits, and new UDP (User Datagram Protocol) and documentation support command-line and server-side Dart applications. Google also highlighted benchmarks such as the Richards benchmark, where Dart 1.1 is running 25% faster than JavaScript, as part of the larger competition between Dart and JavaScript in creating more complex applications in the web development space."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

161 comments

25%?? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979281)

It doesn't seem much of a speed advantage to lure developers away from the ubiquitous JavaScript.

Re:25%?? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979415)

My thoughts exactly -- 25% is near nothing. I'd guess that you could achieve the same or more just with built-in native support for common programming patterns, either by detecting those in the JIT compiler or, where necessary, by providing new built-in JS functions for the script writers to use.

Re:25%?? (1)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 3 months ago | (#45979467)

There is also the advantage of not Dart being a much nicer and consistent language o use than JavaScript, to the point that it would probably be worth it even if it were a bit slower.

Re:25%?? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980731)

Why do they advertise the performance then and not the clean-ness and features of the language?

Re:25%?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45981335)

Then you should really take a look at any number of other languages that can be compiled down to JS. Dart may not be your favorite.

Re:25%?? (4, Insightful)

lgw (121541) | about 3 months ago | (#45979455)

So how long till Google drops this project too? I'm all for new approaches to code that runs in the browser, but I'm a bit hesitant to invest in any technology stack from a company with such a history of dropping projects.

Is there any sort of non-google dev community supporting Dart itself? Or is it completely dependent on Google at this point?

Re:25%?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979911)

So how long till Google drops this project too? I'm all for new approaches to code that runs in the browser, but I'm a bit hesitant to invest in any technology stack from a company with such a history of dropping projects.

Is there any sort of non-google dev community supporting Dart itself? Or is it completely dependent on Google at this point?

This is not about scripting for browsers. It is Google's attempt to compete with node.js which is used for server development. While at present node.js itself uses Google's V8 javascript engine, there's nothing like owning an entire language.

Re:25%?? (4, Informative)

JavaTHut (9877) | about 3 months ago | (#45980065)

Dart is really just the evolution of Google's GWT efforts, which they've been pretty good about supporting long-term and cultivating community contributions while also making a lengthy migration path to Dart

Re:25%?? (5, Informative)

MochaMan (30021) | about 3 months ago | (#45981127)

Dart team member here. The Dart project, like Chromium, is being run as a fully open source project [google.com] accepting patches from Googlers and non-Googlers alike. We've also begun the ECMA Standardization [chromium.org] process, meaning that like JavaScript we'll have a open standard that anyone can implement to. In terms of Dart users, here's a list [dartlang.org] of some. Hope that answers your questions!

Re:25%?? (5, Informative)

rlwhite (219604) | about 3 months ago | (#45979583)

And it appears to be a misquote of TFA too: "Dart’s Javascript output continues to shine. Performance on the Richards benchmark is 25% better than the first release, making runtime comparable to the original JavaScript."

Re:25%?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979773)

Mod this up. They're just saying that when Dart compiles to JavaScript it's finally not slower than having written it in JavaScript in the first place.

Re:25%?? (2)

DickBreath (207180) | about 3 months ago | (#45979775)

MOD PARENT UP.

That is correct. They are saying Dart is 25% faster than earlier Dart. Now almost as good as JavaScript. They are NOT saying it is 25% faster than JavaScript.

Re:25%?? (2)

JavaTHut (9877) | about 3 months ago | (#45980047)

Although in some benchmarks the Dart VM is 25% faster than JavaScript (and much more in other benchmarks). The article quotes are a mess. Just look at the actual benchmark numbers at https://www.dartlang.org/performance/ [dartlang.org] for a good idea of what's actually being claimed.

N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979291)

By david e. sanger and thom shanker = jan. 14, 2014

= URL: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/15/us/nsa-effort-pries-open-computers-not-connected-to-internet.html [nytimes.com]
= Image: http://cryptome.org/2014/01/nsa-quantum-radio.jpg [cryptome.org]
== Coverage #1: http://news.slashdot.org/story/14/01/15/1324216/nyt-nsa-put-100000-radio-pathway-backdoors-in-pcs [slashdot.org]
== Coverage #2: http://cryptome.org/2014/01/nsa-quantum-radio.htm [cryptome.org]
== Coverage #3: http://rt.com/usa/nsa-radio-wave-cyberattack-607/ [rt.com]
== Coverage #4: http://arstechnica.com/security/2014/01/nsa-uses-covert-radio-transmissions-to-monitor-100000-bugged-computers/ [arstechnica.com]
=== Archive: http://web.archive.org/web/20140116010210/http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/15/us/nsa-effort-pries-open-computers-not-connected-to-internet.html [archive.org]

"WASHINGTON - The National Security Agency has implanted software in nearly 100,000 computers around the world that allows the United States to conduct surveillance on those machines and can also create a digital highway for launching cyberattacks.

While most of the software is inserted by gaining access to computer networks, the N.S.A. has increasingly made use of a secret technology that enables it to enter and alter data in computers even if they are not connected to the Internet, according to N.S.A. documents, computer experts and American officials.

The technology, which the agency has used since at least 2008, relies on a covert channel of radio waves that can be transmitted from tiny circuit boards and USB cards inserted surreptitiously into the computers. In some cases, they are sent to a briefcase-size relay station that intelligence agencies can set up miles away from the target.

The radio frequency technology has helped solve one of the biggest problems facing American intelligence agencies for years: getting into computers that adversaries, and some American partners, have tried to make impervious to spying or cyberattack. In most cases, the radio frequency hardware must be physically inserted by a spy, a manufacturer or an unwitting user.

The N.S.A. calls its efforts more an act of "active defense" against foreign cyberattacks than a tool to go on the offensive. But when Chinese attackers place similar software on the computer systems of American companies or government agencies, American officials have protested, often at the presidential level.

Among the most frequent targets of the N.S.A. and its Pentagon partner, United States Cyber Command, have been units of the Chinese Army, which the United States has accused of launching regular digital probes and attacks on American industrial and military targets, usually to steal secrets or intellectual property. But the program, code-named Quantum, has also been successful in inserting software into Russian military networks and systems used by the Mexican police and drug cartels, trade institutions inside the European Union, and sometime partners against terrorism like Saudi Arabia, India and Pakistan, according to officials and an N.S.A. map that indicates sites of what the agency calls "computer network exploitation."

"What's new here is the scale and the sophistication of the intelligence agency's ability to get into computers and networks to which no one has ever had access before," said James Andrew Lewis, the cybersecurity expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. "Some of these capabilities have been around for a while, but the combination of learning how to penetrate systems to insert software and learning how to do that using radio frequencies has given the U.S. a window it's never had before."

No Domestic Use Seen

There is no evidence that the N.S.A. has implanted its software or used its radio frequency technology inside the United States. While refusing to comment on the scope of the Quantum program, the N.S.A. said its actions were not comparable to China's.

"N.S.A.'s activities are focused and specifically deployed against - and only against - valid foreign intelligence targets in response to intelligence requirements," Vanee Vines, an agency spokeswoman, said in a statement. "We do not use foreign intelligence capabilities to steal the trade secrets of foreign companies on behalf of - or give intelligence we collect to - U.S. companies to enhance their international competitiveness or increase their bottom line."

Over the past two months, parts of the program have been disclosed in documents from the trove leaked by Edward J. Snowden, the former N.S.A. contractor. A Dutch newspaper published the map of areas where the United States has inserted spy software, sometimes in cooperation with local authorities, often covertly. Der Spiegel, a German newsmagazine, published the N.S.A.'s catalog of hardware products that can secretly transmit and receive digital signals from computers, a program called ANT. The New York Times withheld some of those details, at the request of American intelligence officials, when it reported, in the summer of 2012, on American cyberattacks on Iran.

President Obama is scheduled to announce on Friday what recommendations he is accepting from an advisory panel on changing N.S.A. practices. The panel agreed with Silicon Valley executives that some of the techniques developed by the agency to find flaws in computer systems undermine global confidence in a range of American-made information products like laptop computers and cloud services.

Embracing Silicon Valley's critique of the N.S.A., the panel has recommended banning, except in extreme cases, the N.S.A. practice of exploiting flaws in common software to aid in American surveillance and cyberattacks. It also called for an end to government efforts to weaken publicly available encryption systems, and said the government should never develop secret ways into computer systems to exploit them, which sometimes include software implants.

Richard A. Clarke, an official in the Clinton and Bush administrations who served as one of the five members of the advisory panel, explained the group's reasoning in an email last week, saying that "it is more important that we defend ourselves than that we attack others."

"Holes in encryption software would be more of a risk to us than a benefit," he said, adding: "If we can find the vulnerability, so can others. It's more important that we protect our power grid than that we get into China's."

From the earliest days of the Internet, the N.S.A. had little trouble monitoring traffic because a vast majority of messages and searches were moved through servers on American soil. As the Internet expanded, so did the N.S.A.'s efforts to understand its geography. A program named Treasure Map tried to identify nearly every node and corner of the web, so that any computer or mobile device that touched it could be located.

A 2008 map, part of the Snowden trove, notes 20 programs to gain access to big fiber-optic cables - it calls them "covert, clandestine or cooperative large accesses" - not only in the United States but also in places like Hong Kong, Indonesia and the Middle East. The same map indicates that the United States had already conducted "more than 50,000 worldwide implants," and a more recent budget document said that by the end of last year that figure would rise to about 85,000. A senior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said the actual figure was most likely closer to 100,000.

That map suggests how the United States was able to speed ahead with implanting malicious software on the computers around the world that it most wanted to monitor - or disable before they could be used to launch a cyberattack.

A Focus on Defense

In interviews, officials and experts said that a vast majority of such implants are intended only for surveillance and serve as an early warning system for cyberattacks directed at the United States.

"How do you ensure that Cyber Command people" are able to look at "those that are attacking us?" a senior official, who compared it to submarine warfare, asked in an interview several months ago.

"That is what the submarines do all the time," said the official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to describe policy. "They track the adversary submarines." In cyberspace, he said, the United States tries "to silently track the adversaries while they're trying to silently track you."

If tracking subs was a Cold War cat-and-mouse game with the Soviets, tracking malware is a pursuit played most aggressively with the Chinese.

The United States has targeted Unit 61398, the Shanghai-based Chinese Army unit believed to be responsible for many of the biggest cyberattacks on the United States, in an effort to see attacks being prepared. With Australia's help, one N.S.A. document suggests, the United States has also focused on another specific Chinese Army unit.

Documents obtained by Mr. Snowden indicate that the United States has set up two data centers in China - perhaps through front companies - from which it can insert malware into computers. When the Chinese place surveillance software on American computer systems - and they have, on systems like those at the Pentagon and at The Times - the United States usually regards it as a potentially hostile act, a possible prelude to an attack. Mr. Obama laid out America's complaints about those practices to President Xi Jinping of China in a long session at a summit meeting in California last June.

At that session, Mr. Obama tried to differentiate between conducting surveillance for national security - which the United States argues is legitimate - and conducting it to steal intellectual property.

"The argument is not working," said Peter W. Singer of the Brookings Institution, a co-author of a new book called "Cybersecurity and Cyberwar." "To the Chinese, gaining economic advantage is part of national security. And the Snowden revelations have taken a lot of the pressure off" the Chinese. Still, the United States has banned the sale of computer servers from a major Chinese manufacturer, Huawei, for fear that they could contain technology to penetrate American networks.

An Old Technology

The N.S.A.'s efforts to reach computers unconnected to a network have relied on a century-old technology updated for modern times: radio transmissions.

In a catalog produced by the agency that was part of the Snowden documents released in Europe, there are page after page of devices using technology that would have brought a smile to Q, James Bond's technology supplier.

One, called Cottonmouth I, looks like a normal USB plug but has a tiny transceiver buried in it. According to the catalog, it transmits information swept from the computer "through a covert channel" that allows "data infiltration and exfiltration." Another variant of the technology involves tiny circuit boards that can be inserted in a laptop computer - either in the field or when they are shipped from manufacturers - so that the computer is broadcasting to the N.S.A. even while the computer's user enjoys the false confidence that being walled off from the Internet constitutes real protection.

The relay station it communicates with, called Nightstand, fits in an oversize briefcase, and the system can attack a computer "from as far away as eight miles under ideal environmental conditions." It can also insert packets of data in milliseconds, meaning that a false message or piece of programming can outrace a real one to a target computer. Similar stations create a link between the target computers and the N.S.A., even if the machines are isolated from the Internet.

Computers are not the only targets. Dropoutjeep attacks iPhones. Other hardware and software are designed to infect large network servers, including those made by the Chinese.

Most of those code names and products are now at least five years old, and they have been updated, some experts say, to make the United States less dependent on physically getting hardware into adversaries' computer systems.

The N.S.A. refused to talk about the documents that contained these descriptions, even after they were published in Europe.

"Continuous and selective publication of specific techniques and tools used by N.S.A. to pursue legitimate foreign intelligence targets is detrimental to the security of the United States and our allies," Ms. Vines, the N.S.A. spokeswoman, said.

But the Iranians and others discovered some of those techniques years ago. The hardware in the N.S.A.'s catalog was crucial in the cyberattacks on Iran's nuclear facilities, code-named Olympic Games, that began around 2008 and proceeded through the summer of 2010, when a technical error revealed the attack software, later called Stuxnet. That was the first major test of the technology.

One feature of the Stuxnet attack was that the technology the United States slipped into Iran's nuclear enrichment plant at Natanz was able to map how it operated, then "phone home" the details. Later, that equipment was used to insert malware that blew up nearly 1,000 centrifuges, and temporarily set back Iran's program.

But the Stuxnet strike does not appear to be the last time the technology was used in Iran. In 2012, a unit of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps moved a rock near the country's underground Fordo nuclear enrichment plant. The rock exploded and spewed broken circuit boards that the Iranian news media described as "the remains of a device capable of intercepting data from computers at the plant." The origins of that device have never been determined.

On Sunday, according to the semiofficial Fars news agency, Iran's Oil Ministry issued another warning about possible cyberattacks, describing a series of defenses it was erecting - and making no mention of what are suspected of being its own attacks on Saudi Arabia's largest oil producer."

"A version of this article appears in print on January 15, 2014, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: N.S.A. Devises Radio Pathway Into Computers."

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

The New Zealand Copyright Act 1994 specifies certain circumstances where all or a substantial part of a copyright work may be used without the copyright owner's permission. A "fair dealing" with copyright material does not infringe copyright if it is for the following purposes: research or private study; criticism or review; or reporting current events.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

This is based mostly on the NSA Catalog released by Jacob Appelbaum and Der Spiegel on 30 December 2013:

http://cryptome.org/2013/12/nsa-catalog.zip [cryptome.org] (16.2MB)

NY Times reportedly has the full Snowden material sent to it by The Guardian but, like others, has published very little of it:

http://cryptome.org/2013/11/snowden-tally.htm [cryptome.org]

New test on who RTFA (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979341)

Make it so that link in the article is broken. See who notices.

Broken Link (3, Informative)

rjmarvin (3001897) | about 3 months ago | (#45979343)

The first link is broken, it loops back to the submission.

Re:Broken Link (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979357)

Maybe it's gone the way of Google Reader already...

Re:Broken Link (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979391)

Should be:

http://sdt.bz/content/article.aspx?ArticleID=67599&page=1

aka

http://sdt.bz/67591

Re:Broken Link: HEY PEOPLE WHO RUN SLASHDOT (2)

rjmarvin (3001897) | about 3 months ago | (#45979721)

Get your shit together, the top link of a prominent story remains broken.

Re:Broken Link: HEY PEOPLE WHO RUN SLASHDOT (2)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about 3 months ago | (#45979751)

Yeah, seriously. It could use a little editing too. The submitter apparently wrote that it is 25% faster than Javascript, when the article says that Dart 1.1 produces 25% faster Javascript than Dart 1.0.

Wait, you're the submitter. Why did you write that it's 25% faster than Javascript?

Re:Broken Link: HEY PEOPLE WHO RUN SLASHDOT (1)

rjmarvin (3001897) | about 3 months ago | (#45979833)

I suppose the most honest answer would be, whoops?

Re:Broken Link: HEY PEOPLE WHO RUN SLASHDOT (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | about 3 months ago | (#45980493)

either that or "yay Dart, I love Dart, let me hype it up as much as possible with some slightly vague claim that I can say was a mistake".

Pah. Let me know when they make NaCl more ubiquitous in browsers.

Re:Broken Link: HEY PEOPLE WHO RUN SLASHDOT (0)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 3 months ago | (#45979935)

Get your shit together, the top link of a prominent story remains broken.

This is simply to get you ready for the event that after you get interested in Dart and maybe learn and build something with it, Google will EOL it and cancel the project.

If MS wrote dart for IE instead (3, Interesting)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 3 months ago | (#45979349)

Everyone here would be screaming bloody murder and all MS is trying to sabotage the web again?! But if Google does it then it is cool and innovative.

I am tired of chrome not implementing W3C standards without using the -webkit to get it to work properly. I am not the only once concerned it is the next IE 6 [pcmag.com] but thankfully there are only a few sites which only work well in Chrome.

Mozilla Firefox is catching up and has the fasted DOM according to tomshardware and ASM.JS looks to be rather interesting. Unfortunately it is agaisn't Google's interest to support it as they want a closed ecosystem similar to IE 6 and activeX before it.

I still use Chrome as Firefox is still behind in a few areas, but even IE is catching up and I find both IE and Firefox to use less ram than Chrome.

billy gates (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979395)

Nice try Bill!

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (2)

Nerdfest (867930) | about 3 months ago | (#45979479)

Is Dart an open language spec? I've assumed it is, but may be incorrect. That's usually what detracts from Microsoft's attempts ... they try to lock you to Microsoft. If this is just as locked, it's just as useless. If it's open, can be forked, etc, if Google goes Microsoft-like, then it's a great idea.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (5, Informative)

TopSpin (753) | about 3 months ago | (#45979709)

Is Dart an open language spec?

The language spec is CCA 3 and ECMA standards tracked. The source code is BSD.

Javascript was not an immaculate conception of Berners-Lee, Torvalds and Stallman. It was a product of Mozilla, blessed by nobody and foisted on the world via the defacto browser of the day. It is also more than flawed enough to justify some competition.

The <script> tag has a "language" attribute for a reason, the curmudgeons of Slashdot notwithstanding.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (1)

narcc (412956) | about 3 months ago | (#45979889)

It is also more than flawed enough to justify some competition.

How so? Are you familiar with the language at all?

The tag has a "language" attribute for a reason

Not any more. It's been depreciated for a while now.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980127)

Deprecated in favor of the type= attribute, which does the same thing.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 3 months ago | (#45980717)

It is also more than flawed enough to justify some competition.

How so? Are you familiar with the language at all?

I'm 90% sure that the reason Javascript was built as a prototype-based language [wikipedia.org] is because that was the easiest way to create the interpreter.

Javascript's scoping rules are horrible, though. Overall the language is fine, if you avoid certain parts, but it's not a great example of anything.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (1)

narcc (412956) | about 3 months ago | (#45981397)

I'm 90% sure that the reason Javascript was built as a prototype-based language is because that was the easiest way to create the interpreter.

Possibly, but the reason doesn't seem relevant. Being accidentally well-designed isn't exactly a strong criticism!

Javascript's scoping rules are horrible, though.

Sorry, what's wrong with them? I've heard that before, but I've yet to hear an actual reason. I've looked, but can't even begin to understand this complaint.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45981383)

depreciate != deprecate

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (2)

Ceriel Nosforit (682174) | about 3 months ago | (#45981409)

How so? Are you familiar with the language at all?

Can't speak for him, but I do. Dart has for example a Future class which actually immediately tells you what is going on even when you have derived your own version of it, when Javascript has as many solutions to the concurrency problem as there are programmers. I often think of Javascript as a write-only language, while Dart code actually opens itself up rather well to studying.

I think that most importantly Dart seems to know what it is and what its purpose is. Javascript was excellent when the web was new since no one knew how to solve the repeating engineering problems, but since jQuery came around it appears more like a tool for inventing infinite ways to shoot yourself in the foot. Dart knows you'll probably want to do something MVC-like and eventually shoe-horn it into the dreaded DOM. They are paying lots of attention to the Canvas element though, and know that Pointer Events is the Way.

Juxtapose, the C/C++ I learned back in the day looks completely different from what it looks like now. I hardly knew what was going on when I did some network / sensor work with Nokia's Qt SDK, but cargo-culting saw me through. You could see the language's age, while Dart doesn't have that legacy cruft.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (2)

rlwhite (219604) | about 3 months ago | (#45979809)

From the spec: (https://www.dartlang.org/docs/spec/latest/dart-language-specification.html#h.jn6bj1irtqj1)
"Except as otherwise noted, the content of this document is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License, and code samples are licensed under the BSD License."

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (1)

sanosuke001 (640243) | about 3 months ago | (#45979489)

Any replacement for javascript is a step in the right direction. If they dropped dynamic types altogether it would be a much better alternative than it already is.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 3 months ago | (#45979563)

What I would like to see is a virtual machine. Yeah it will add bloat and waste cpu etc.

But a VM will increase security and any language can run inside it. So once can use python for example or make up his or her own language and have that JIT compile if it is not cached and run etc. Kind of like people usuing Java to run python with jython but more vm than sandbox like.

I see Google's native client and NACL and this as just that. They are making Chrome into a ChromeOS virtual machine where it is all a Google ecosystem. Maybe this would be a great idea for HTML 6 and CSS 4 standards. Have a VM that does x,y, and z.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979737)

How about this: a 'browser' is just a script that downloads, chmod+xs, and runs any bytestream it encounters, and you only run a 'browser' in an already-established virtual machine like VirtualBox or VMWare. Then you can leave the crumbling remains of the 'internet' we already have to me, and I'll be content with my 2M browser that allows me to read text with a little markup, and you can enjoy websites with polygon counts in the tens of thousands with 3D in-your-face drop-down menus.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (1)

gnoshi (314933) | about 3 months ago | (#45979849)

What, like Java?

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980237)

Yes, like Java. No, don't bring up the arguments against the Java plugin.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45981037)

Exactly. Except that Sun did it wrong way back when, and never bothered to get it right.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980051)

You know, Sun tried this with Java oh, ~15 or so years ago.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979505)

Chrome can never be IE6, because Chrome auto-updates. Also because there are viable alternatives now vs when IE was dominating.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979535)

I wish Google was less pushy with their tech. Mozilla's making them look worse and worse as the years go by. Google makes a bunch of iffy languages for the web while Mozilla makes one very promising systems language, and upstands Google by showing they could just incrementally improve Javascript at a faster rate. One of them wants the world to change to their model, the other is working to change the world from within.

I get the impression that Google just wants people to use their tech. With the advent of asm.js and languages like Coffeescript, it's become clear that NaCl and Dart aren't as practical or useful as Google hoped. They really should have thought about other vendors before they pushed their own standards out the door and hoped everyone would use them just 'cause they're shiny Google tech.

Hell, these are the same guys that paved the way properly with SPDY, getting clout with other browser vendors and with HTTP servers to implement it, and embarrassing the HTTP guys into finally making HTTP2 a reality. Shame they otherwise seem to be replacing the entire web stack with their own version, hoping for business interests to do their dirty work (as with how WebP is being pushed by image hosters regardless of how iffy it is).

Re:WebP (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980915)

Faster Downloading

Er What? (1)

DarthVain (724186) | about 3 months ago | (#45979589)

"Unfortunately it is agaisn't Google's interest to support it..."

Are you talking about Firefox or W3C? Because I am pretty sure Google is Firefox's single largest contributor of funds.

Re:Er What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979607)

ASM.JS I am referring too.

Mozilla is trying to submit it but no one is interested as Adobe, Apple, Microsoft, and Google are part of the W3C and view it as a potential threat to their own plans.

Re:Er What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980049)

ASM.js isn't half as useful as most dumbshit web developers seem to think it is. It won't do anything for 99% of the web apps out there.

Re:Er What? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980017)

They wouldn't be doing so if Firefox wasn't contributing back enough to their own bottom line to justify it. Only one of the two is a non-profit organization.

Plus, Google has been rushing out an entire web stack's worth of standards lately: SPDY, WebP, NaCl, Pepper, Dart.. the list goes on and on. They don't want to improve existing standards, they want to replace them with Google's own versions.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (-1)

Tumbleweed (3706) | about 3 months ago | (#45979675)

I am tired of chrome not implementing W3C standards without using the -webkit to get it to work properly. I am not the only once concerned it is the next IE 6 [pcmag.com] but thankfully there are only a few sites which only work well in Chrome.

You seem to have no idea why IE6 was the big problem it was. It's not possible for Chrome to be "the new IE6", since:

1) It's not tied into Windows
2) It auto-updates silently, and new version adoption is VERY high among Chrome users.
3) vendor prefixes are not much of a problem compared to not implementing features at all, or implementing them badly.

Nice troll attempt, though.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979691)

Ok so you have to use a non standard -webkit to make it function right. No that is not IE 6 at all as adding custom jscript is not much of a problem either.

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980439)

None of your bullet points refute the argument.

The point is that developers target the features of a browser instead of the standards the browser is supposed to support and you end up with sites telling you need to upgrade your browser to Chrome...

Re:If MS wrote dart for IE instead (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980251)

So, let me get this straight: first, you complain about Chrome and Google and how they're trying to force people into a closed ecosystem and so on. Then you talk about how Firefox is the fastestest ever and use less RAM and so on.

And, finally, you state that, despite all that, you're still using Chrome. ...I think it's called Stockholm Syndrome.

better than javascript? (4, Interesting)

schneidafunk (795759) | about 3 months ago | (#45979359)

My understanding is that Dart will not be really useful until it has native browser support on all browsers. I have not used it, so please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm curious to know if anyone who has experience with it can explain the benefits.

Re:better than javascript? (1, Interesting)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 3 months ago | (#45979431)

There is also ASM.JS that Firefox is on the bandwagon with but of course it is against the interest of the 2 organizations to support the opposite as they want to dominate.

Even if MS supported one or both in future versions of IE both Chrome and Firefox still hold too much a grip before anyone could adopt. It is frustrating as I do not trust Dart as it is highly tied to the chrome native platform and may have patents and licensing issues.

Re:better than javascript? (4, Interesting)

LWATCDR (28044) | about 3 months ago | (#45979469)

dart does have a compile to javascript option.

Re:better than javascript? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980459)

dart does have a compile to javascript option.

No. Microsoft proved that wrong. It does not, and it will not for many years. Dart will only currently run under Dartium according to Microsoft. Google claims there is a dart2js tool, but it doesn't work yet.

Re:better than javascript? (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 3 months ago | (#45979827)

Huh? Dart compiles to javascript. Eventually native support would be nice, but since I can't see Microsoft being keen to implement anything by Google, Javascript generated from Dart source will remain dominant for some time. If, as the article says, that the generated Javascript is at near native Javascript speeds, I might be awfully tempted to give Dart a try. I know Javascript has its defenders, but man oh man I find it a difficult, even painful language to do anything useful in.

Re:better than javascript? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980489)

Fortunately for Google, MS couldn't stop them from creating a plug-in to implement Dart, a la ActiveX. MS has a superset of Javascript called TypeScript and it's free and open: http://www.typescriptlang.org/ [typescriptlang.org]

Re:better than javascript? (1)

MouseTheLuckyDog (2752443) | about 3 months ago | (#45980137)

I'm curious to know if anyone who has experience with it can explain the benefits.

I'm sorry I don't have much experience with it but the benefits should be obvious: it's not javascript.

Re:better than javascript? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980789)

Then why not use any language that compiles down to Javascript instead of Dart? What real benefits are there to Dart specifically that makes it better than, say, Coffeescript or compiling something more mainstream down to asm.js (which will run on other browsers the same way as Dart, since it's just JS)?

Re:better than javascript? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980361)

Dart will not be really useful

You hateful Microsoft fanbois are all the same. Why do you keep telling that lie? We all know it is a lie so you are insane if you think that if you keep telling the same lie over and over again that we will suddenly believe you. That is the definition of insanity. Please stop trying to ruin this site with that nonsense. As anyone with any experience with Dart knows, the JavaScript it outputs runs fine on all modern browsers. There is no need for native Dart support. It was made from the ground-up to not require that. Again, it is ridiculous that you Microsoft people keep saying that the truth is not true. Please just stop posting.

Re:better than javascript? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980453)

Correct. I assume you're quoting the internal Microsoft memo on Dart which explains clearly that Dart does not convert correctly to JavaScript yet. Microsoft's estimate is that will not be working until at least 2017. With the evidence that has been released, only a liar would say that you can run Dart in anything besides Dartium. Microsoft has proven the useless of the Dart garbage.

*Not* 25% faster than javascript (2)

erice (13380) | about 3 months ago | (#45979441)

I was wondering how it could be 25% faster than javascript when it compiled into javascript so I checked out TFA.

Performance on the Richards benchmark is 25% better than the first release, making runtime comparable to the original JavaScript.

So it has 25% faster javascript output. It is not 25% faster than javascript.

Re:*Not* 25% faster than javascript (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979661)

I was wondering how it could be 25% faster than javascript when it compiled into javascript so I checked out TFA.

Performance on the Richards benchmark is 25% better than the first release, making runtime comparable to the original JavaScript.

So it has 25% faster javascript output. It is not 25% faster than javascript.

No, it's both. Dart can/will run natively in Chrome/Chromium. You can get a version of it that has Dart enabled at https://www.dartlang.org/tools/dartium/

Re:*Not* 25% faster than javascript (2)

Shados (741919) | about 3 months ago | (#45979961)

Dart has an actual VM of its own. Its probably what they're benchmarking. It can be cross compiled, but it doesn't have to.

Re:*Not* 25% faster than javascript (1)

JavaTHut (9877) | about 3 months ago | (#45980121)

See https://www.dartlang.org/performance/ [dartlang.org] , in some cases they actually are claiming that the cross-compiled javascript performance outperforms the standardized implementation of an algorithm written originally in Javascript (e.g. the DeltaBlue and Tracer benchmarks)

Re:*Not* 25% faster than javascript (1)

wiredlogic (135348) | about 3 months ago | (#45981133)

If you follow the links in the article you'll see a chart [dartlang.org] with "dart", "dart2js", and "js v8". The native Dart implementation is 25% faster than JS. The dart2js conversion is slightly slower.

Time to Get Out (0, Troll)

sycodon (149926) | about 3 months ago | (#45979529)

Time to leave IT.

Nothing but an endless cycle of new languages that do the same thing with a different syntax and different order. The so-called advances in IT are kind of like the advances in MS Office...mostly rearranging the menus and renaming commands.

Re:Time to Get Out (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979723)

Except it looks just like C++

Re:Time to Get Out (0)

SirGarlon (845873) | about 3 months ago | (#45979735)

Low-level technical skills have a half-life of only about three to five years. Meaning, half of what you know is obsolete in three to five years. This is true in software engineering and also, I've read, in most other kinds of engineering.

Experienced professionals know this and compensate by making a career-long commitment to staying current and developing new skills.

By all means, I encourage anyone who cannot stand the heat to get out of the kitchen. You'll be happier in a position where learning is not required, and I'll be happier not to get stuck working with another has-been.

Re:Time to Get Out (0)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 3 months ago | (#45979791)

Low-level technical skills have a half-life of only about three to five years. Meaning, half of what you know is obsolete in three to five years. This is true in software engineering and also, I've read, in most other kinds of engineering.

I think that's the first time I've heard "low-level technical skills" and "engineering" said in the same breath.

Experienced professionals know this and compensate by making a career-long commitment to staying current and developing new skills.

By all means, I encourage anyone who cannot stand the heat to get out of the kitchen. You'll be happier in a position where learning is not required, and I'll be happier not to get stuck working with another has-been.

What modest humility.</sarc>

Re:Time to Get Out (0)

sycodon (149926) | about 3 months ago | (#45979975)

I look forward to completing my MBA and becoming your manager.

How do you feel about working weekends?

Re:Time to Get Out (4, Insightful)

Kielistic (1273232) | about 3 months ago | (#45979877)

How is this insightful? Of course all new languages do the same thing as the old ones. They're all Turing complete! If you don't understand that then, yes, you probably should leave IT. And don't forget to program everything in Assembler! Kids these days and their C. Just a crutch.

Re:Time to Get Out (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980369)

How can you miss the point that each new language is an exercise in futility?

Doing the same thing over and over again, even with variations, and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.

Re:Time to Get Out (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980847)

And they charge you $160 for the textbook, which are the same as the last edition except that the text is in a different color and there's a different set of irrelevant pictures of astronauts and so forth.

Wait... what was this thread about again?

Re:GC (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980951)

C or C++ is losing market share...

we need language agnostic hooks (1)

FunkyELF (609131) | about 3 months ago | (#45979585)

Why Dart? Why not a language agnostic runtime and then have Dart target that?
Then when some new (or old) language wants to run in the browser you don't have to update your browser for it.

I don't have to upgrade my CPU to run a new language.
I don't have to upgrade my OS to run a new language.
Why should I have to upgrade my browser?... its time that browsers have a nice interface that any code could hook into.
How about LLVM or something as a standard?

I think Google is already doing this with Native Client... though I think they sandbox/sanitize the generated machine code rather than the LLVM bytecode.

Re:we need language agnostic hooks (1)

marcello_dl (667940) | about 3 months ago | (#45979613)

The purpose of dart is probably to push chrome as the leading platform (which browsers are, nowadays). All you ask goes in the opposite direction.
The LLVM as standard would be a great idea. Java ideals done right.

Re:we need language agnostic hooks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980287)

Would be ideal, but it's not going to happen like that. asm.js is a slightly more realistic approach.

Why not just make JS cooler? (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | about 3 months ago | (#45979703)

Make JS cooler, why start something new to fix an old problem?

vendor lock in (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979817)

greedy corporate scum is why (that's the answer to 99% of today's world questions)

Re:Why not just make JS cooler? (1)

dingen (958134) | about 3 months ago | (#45980687)

JS is already improving very nicely. ECMA5 is a huge improvement, and it's getting more consistent with each version.

There's really no need to invent a whole new programming language for the browser. JS does its job just fine already, it just has some legacy issues which are being fixed over time.

There's no way Dart or whatever language will be "perfect" or even close to something like that, so going for this approach serves no purpose at all.

Re:Why not just make JS cooler? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980997)

The biggest problem with JS is that for a long time Mozilla was the only company pushing the newer features forward with a large enough userbase to matter. By the time Webkit and Chrome came along and helped unseat IE, everyone forgot that anything beyond JS 1.4 existed. It's not like most web developers WANT to keep on top of their trade; they still hide behind IE6 as a reason to stay in their comfy jQuery holes and not learn the modern tech.

Javascript needs a replacement (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45979873)

I like Dart, I understand why it's useful and important. But even if you hate the Google and their obvious attempts to destroy the internet, Javascript is the wrong language for the "future". While I enjoy using JS for small things, it has many many issues. I think it's telling that while simple things are simple, the _best written_ javascript is utterly inscrutable to me. And what readability there is does not cross expert code borders. It might as well be Perl.

Plays well with JQuery? (1)

drjohnretired (1345973) | about 3 months ago | (#45980061)

I have not seen any comments as to how well Dart works with JQuery and JQueryUI, I have found these tools allow me to actually make javascript and client side programming actually work.

Re:Plays well with JQuery? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980977)

You don't need jQuery, because jQuery was created to get around the horribleness of working with the DOM in plain JavaScript. Dart doesn't suffer from that.

Re:Plays well with JQuery? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45981005)

Stockholm syndrome.

How to spot biased benchmarks: lesson 1 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45980395)

When a benchmark comparing language A to language B claims that code compiled from A to B runs faster than native code in B, it can only mean that their implementation in B was less than optimal.

Google is not worthy of trust, period. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#45981117)

If the sudden ending of numerous Google products is not sufficient reason for you to be extremely circumspect
toward using anything from Google, then you must have achieved the eternal sunshine of the spotless mind.

I don't have such an easily scrubbed memory, and I would not trust Google with anything of even minor importance because
time is the most valuable resource any of us have, and Google has shown no compunction about wasting the time of thousands
of people, in a most cavalier manner.

Secondly, sure it's "open source" but does this really guarantee Google won't be up to no good, as it often has been in the past ( "accidental" gathering of wireless access point info by the street view cars, etc. ).

Ceylon as alternative to Dart (1)

javacowboy (222023) | about 3 months ago | (#45981327)

Slightly offtopic but Ceylon will run on top of the JavaScript runtime, so this an alternative to Dart.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...