D for the web?

Nick Sabalausky a at a.a
Tue Jan 24 14:51:40 PST 2012


"Tobias Pankrath" <tobias at pankrath.net> wrote in message 
news:jfmm43$1c99$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>
>> "Tobias Pankrath" <tobias at pankrath.net> wrote in message
>> news:jfkn05$h2n$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>>>> Am I the only one who thinks this sounds like a horrible idea? :)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It's horrible, but not as horrible as using straight JavaScript (or
>>>> CoffeeScript, IMO).
>>>>
>>>> It's a necessary evil thanks to JavaScript's underserved ubiquity.
>>>
>>> Google Web Toolkit works quite well.
>>
>> I'd have a hard time trusting it. Would the resulting code necessarily 
>> use
>> Ajax even if I didn't want it to? How much JS overhead does it pull in 
>> for
>> simple uses of JS? Does the resulting code automatically interact with
>> Google's servers in any way? How compatible is the resulting JS? Would 
>> the
>> resulting code break the page when JS is off? It's Google, for god's 
>> sake,
>> can they even be trusted at all? Etc.
>
> Can't see any technical argument here.

What's your point? Any one of them answered the wrong way would render it 
unusuable for my use-cases. Technical or not, that certainly makes them 
relevent.




More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list