Re:Traditional JavaScript benchmarks
by fnordsensei on Saturday December 17, 2016 @04:03PM
(#13202595)
I guess it comes down to what you mean by "important". I for one hope that airplanes, power plants and medical machinery are all programmed with something else.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Traditional JavaScript benchmarks
by SomeCallMeTim on Saturday December 17, 2016 @10:49PM
(#13204210)
I never claimed that JavaScript was or should be used in any of the above. Just that it's "important in software engineering", by which I mean it's used or usable by people in 80% of the actual jobs in "software engineering."
I'd probably prefer to see a language like Go or Rust in critical systems. Self driving cars come to mind as well, but probably anything IoT or otherwise infrastructure related. But I think those jobs, all together, are a minority of programming positions.
I hope so, anyway, because I don't actually believe there are enough smart developers to work on critical systems if it's anything like half or more of the software engineering population. Most developers pretty well suck.
Re:Traditional JavaScript benchmarks
by fnordsensei on Sunday December 18, 2016 @01:28PM
(#13206884)
I didn't mean to imply that you made such a claim. It was just a way to point out an alternative interpretation of "important." That is, some things may be of greater importance even if there are fewer of them.
It's nitpicking really, I understand that you had a particular perspective on what "important" meant in this case.
If the author had said the same thing about <insert any language> that would have been wrong too...
Re:Traditional JavaScript benchmarks
by Skunkleton on Saturday December 17, 2016 @06:51PM
(#13203461)
It sure would have been.
Re:Traditional JavaScript benchmarks
by fnordsensei on Saturday December 17, 2016 @07:15PM
(#13203535)
Agreed.
Re:Traditional JavaScript benchmarks
by debaserab2 on Saturday December 17, 2016 @06:57PM
(#13203479)
correct