D to Javascript converter (a hacked up dmd)

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2012-03-02 19:13, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Jacob Carlborg"<doob at me.com>  wrote in message
> news:jiptfu$qrg$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> On 2012-02-29 18:46, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>> "Alex Rønne Petersen"<xtzgzorex at gmail.com>   wrote in message
>>> news:jilnie$1fsr$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>>> On 29-02-2012 18:32, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>>> On 2/26/12 9:51 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
>>>>>> https://github.com/downloads/adamdruppe/dtojs/dtojs.zip
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>> That's interesting. So the idea is to make an entire subset of D
>>>>> convertible to Javascript?
>>>>>
>>>>> What use cases do you have in mind?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Andrei
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Avoiding writing JS directly in web apps comes to mind.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yea, creating JS without having to actually *write* JS is a huge use-case
>>> in
>>> and of itself.
>>>
>>> (I still can't believe the web has standardized on such an absolute shit
>>> langauge. Hell, two of them if you count PHP on the server.)
>>
>> Five if you count HTML, CSS and SQL as well.
>>
>
> Very true, but a far as shittiness goes, JS and PHP are in a whole other
> league (IMO).

Yeah, I agree. I'm just saying, thank god I don't have to use PHP in my 
job. I'm using CoffeeScript instead of JavaScript whenever I can which 
makes it a bit more bearable. Yes I know many people here don't like CS, 
specially the syntax, but it fixes several of the most annoying things 
about JS.

> Actually, HTML/CSS for what they are - *document* description formats -
> really aren't all that bad. The only real *major* problem with HTML/CSS is
> not the formats themselves, but the fact that people keep abusing them as
> application presentation layers, which they clearly aren't and were never
> intended to be. (And basing an entire application around the
> deliberately-stateless HTTP? Seriously? WTF?)
>
> Latex isn't bad (from what little I've seen), but if people started
> pretending it was a presentation layer for programs, then yea, it would
> completely blow for that. But that's exactly what people did with HTML/CSS.
> So HTML and CSS get a bad reputation when really the true blame lies with
> the people pushing for their misuse. (Not that HTML/CSS couldn't be improved
> even as pure document formats.)

Yes, I think both HTML and CSS could be improved a lot. One of the most 
annoying things is there's no good way to handle scoping. SASS 
(regardless of which syntax you choose to use) makes this problem less 
annoying and fixes several other issues with CSS. The fact that you most 
likely uses a server side language to output HTML fixes many of the 
problems with HTML.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg