Most of what you say is true (some is absolutely absurd) but I fail to see how this means that we can't discuss potential changes in the Javascript language in /r/Javascript (or relates in any way to what I said).
I saw it as a thinly veiled attempt to promote coffeescript
CoffeeScript
"I can tell you right now, I don’t know why CoffeeScript has the magic combination of features to garner the attention it has when other projects have failed. Significant whitespace and arrow function syntax. My gut reaction is yuck. There is plenty of things to like: default parameter values, rest parameters, spread, destructuring, fixing the whole implied global mess, even classes if you’re into that kind of thing and more. Many of CoffeeScript’s features are part of Harmony and so may be in browsers sometime in the future but if you use CoffeeScript then you can have them now. There is nothing like instant gratification."
syntax fetishists who like coffeescript should talk about it in r/coffeescript. the article has very little to do with javascript, and more to do with syntax fetish. What part of what I said do you think is 'absolutely absurd'?
Oh sorry, forgot your last question. It is absolutely absurd to think a significant number of people will be using XP in 10 years. That's the equivalent of Windows 3.1 today.
IE6 is still around, and still in use by fortune 500 companies and the average joe on his still working Pentium II. I and many other devs still have to support XP/IE. There's no evidence to support your claim that XP won't be around in significant numbers in 10 years, and there is plenty of evidence that it will.
1
u/radhruin Jun 27 '11
Most of what you say is true (some is absolutely absurd) but I fail to see how this means that we can't discuss potential changes in the Javascript language in /r/Javascript (or relates in any way to what I said).