Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #18161 > unrolled thread

http://seshukv.blogspot.in/2013/01/typescript-introduction.html

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

Contents

  http://seshukv.blogspot.in/2013/01/typescript-introduction.html Seshu Koorella <kurella.seshu@gmail.com> - 2013-01-20 04:11 -0800
    Re: http://seshukv.blogspot.in/2013/01/typescript-introduction.html "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2013-01-20 09:27 -0800
      TypeScript (was: http://seshukv.blogspot.in/2013/01/typescript-introduction.html) Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-01-20 21:48 +0100
        Re: TypeScript (was: http://seshukv.blogspot.in/2013/01/typescript-introduction.html) "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2013-01-20 14:04 -0800
          Re: TypeScript Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2013-01-20 23:08 +0100
            Re: TypeScript "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2013-01-20 14:42 -0800

#18161 — http://seshukv.blogspot.in/2013/01/typescript-introduction.html

Introduction to TypeScript a open source super set of JavaScript from Microsoft.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#18162

On Sunday, January 20, 2013 6:11:59 AM UTC-6, Seshu Koorella wrote:
> Introduction to TypeScript a open source super set of JavaScript from Microsoft.

I believe TypeScript is off-topic as much as CoffeeScript, ActionScript, JScript.NET, Mascara, and other "supersets" of JavaScript. The soon-to-be ES6 would be on-topic though

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18170 — TypeScript (was: http://seshukv.blogspot.in/2013/01/typescript-introduction.html)

Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:

> On Sunday, January 20, 2013 6:11:59 AM UTC-6, Seshu Koorella wrote:
>> Introduction to TypeScript a open source super set of JavaScript from
>> Microsoft.
> 
> I believe TypeScript is off-topic as much as CoffeeScript, ActionScript,
> JScript.NET, Mascara, and other "supersets" of JavaScript. The soon-to-be
> ES6 would be on-topic though

I do not know about TypeScript, but you are mistaken about most of the other 
languages.

It is particular nonsense to say that JScript .NET would be a “superset” of 
JavaScript.  In fact, their similarity draws from the fact that both of them 
are implementations of ECMAScript:

JavaScript is Netscape's, now Mozilla.org's, implementation of ECMAScript 
Editions 1, 2, 3, and (currently) 5.x.

JScript .NET (JScript 8.x and 10.x) is Microsoft's implementation of a 
Netscape proposal for ECMAScript Edition 4 which, among other features, 
provides class-based inheritance, and was maintained by Waldemar Horwat of 
Netscape back then, that has been adapted for Microsoft's .NET framework.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18171 — Re: TypeScript (was: http://seshukv.blogspot.in/2013/01/typescript-introduction.html)

On Sunday, January 20, 2013 2:48:01 PM UTC-6, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> > On Sunday, January 20, 2013 6:11:59 AM UTC-6, Seshu Koorella wrote:
> 
> >> Introduction to TypeScript a open source super set of JavaScript from
> 
> >> Microsoft.
> 
> > 
> 
> > I believe TypeScript is off-topic as much as CoffeeScript, ActionScript,
> 
> > JScript.NET, Mascara, and other "supersets" of JavaScript. The soon-to-be
> 
> > ES6 would be on-topic though
> 
> 
> 
> I do not know about TypeScript, but you are mistaken about most of the other 
> 
> languages.
> 
> 
> 
> It is particular nonsense to say that JScript .NET would be a “superset” of 
> 
> JavaScript.  In fact, their similarity draws from the fact that both of them 
> 
> are implementations of ECMAScript:
> 
> 
> 
> JavaScript is Netscape's, now Mozilla.org's, implementation of ECMAScript 
> 
> Editions 1, 2, 3, and (currently) 5.x.
> 
> 
> 
> JScript .NET (JScript 8.x and 10.x) is Microsoft's implementation of a 
> 
> Netscape proposal for ECMAScript Edition 4 which, among other features, 
> 
> provides class-based inheritance, and was maintained by Waldemar Horwat of 
> 
> Netscape back then, that has been adapted for Microsoft's .NET framework.
> 

I used scare quotes consciously. I have heard the superset claim more than once in relation to each of these languages, where a more accurate term would be divergence. The word JavaScript is being used in its common parlance. "JavaScript" is not a context free word as much as one may wish otherwise.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18172 — Re: TypeScript

Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:

[Full quote intended]

> On Sunday, January 20, 2013 2:48:01 PM UTC-6, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn
> wrote:
>> Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> > On Sunday, January 20, 2013 6:11:59 AM UTC-6, Seshu Koorella wrote:
>> 
>> >> Introduction to TypeScript a open source super set of JavaScript from
>> 
>> >> Microsoft.
>> 
>> > 
>> 
>> > I believe TypeScript is off-topic as much as CoffeeScript,
>> > ActionScript,
>> 
>> > JScript.NET, Mascara, and other "supersets" of JavaScript. The
>> > soon-to-be
>> 
>> > ES6 would be on-topic though
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I do not know about TypeScript, but you are mistaken about most of the
>> other
>> 
>> languages.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> It is particular nonsense to say that JScript .NET would be a “superset”
>> of
>> 
>> JavaScript.  In fact, their similarity draws from the fact that both of
>> them
>> 
>> are implementations of ECMAScript:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> JavaScript is Netscape's, now Mozilla.org's, implementation of ECMAScript
>> 
>> Editions 1, 2, 3, and (currently) 5.x.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> JScript .NET (JScript 8.x and 10.x) is Microsoft's implementation of a
>> 
>> Netscape proposal for ECMAScript Edition 4 which, among other features,
>> 
>> provides class-based inheritance, and was maintained by Waldemar Horwat
>> of
>> 
>> Netscape back then, that has been adapted for Microsoft's .NET framework.

This is next to unreadable.  Do not use Google Groups for posting.

> I used scare quotes consciously. I have heard the superset claim more than
> once in relation to each of these languages, where a more accurate term
> would be divergence. The word JavaScript is being used in its common
> parlance.

If saying “‘superset’ of JavaScript” when meaning “ECMAScript 
implementation” is “common parlance”, then, unsurprisingly,
”common parlance” is utterly wrong.

> "JavaScript" is not a context free word as much as one may wish
> otherwise.

Spoken like a true ignorant.  Oh well, you cannot say I did not try.

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#18173 — Re: TypeScript

On Sunday, January 20, 2013 4:08:55 PM UTC-6, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

> If saying “‘superset’ of JavaScript” when meaning “ECMAScript 
> implementation” is “common parlance”, then, unsurprisingly,
> ”common parlance” is utterly wrong.

I would agree, but I don't care enough to act otherwise. It is more expedient to use the term "JavaScript" or "JS" in most conversations.

 

>> "JavaScript" is not a context free word as much as one may wish otherwise.

> Spoken like a true ignorant.  Oh well, you cannot say I did not try.

It is not ignorance if I am aware of the knowledge; but once again in the name of expedience, less than accurate terms may be required. You seem to me to be the only person with a dog in this fight, so good luck. If I responding to someone else I may use different terminology. Emphasis on "may".

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web