Talk:Dart (programming language)

Legal or economical Trap?

I found no info about the license. And Google will always be the one who defines what "Dart" is - we should have a chapter on the factual dependency in relation to Google which is - in fact - a company with quite a monopoly in many regards and a huge power to make things like they want them to be. For example making people believe they don't do no evil. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.130.44.115 (talk) 07:44, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

According to http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-10-google-dart-debut-chatter-javascript.html it's released under the BSD license. (Googled "google dart license"). That's a bit second-hand so isn't really good enough for an article reference? However, that was the only obvious reference I could find, so it's better to say nothing at this time until more info emerges. Your comment about monopolies, doing evil etc. isn't directly relevant to the article and would be better suited to the main entry for google itself. When faced with no information or evidence, don't jump to one conclusion or another too soon. Rob Burbidge (talk) 10:55, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

The implementation's license is stated on https://code.google.com/p/dart/ - it's the "new BSD license". The language specification at http://www.dartlang.org/docs/spec/dartLangSpec.pdf claims that "Except as otherwise noted at http://code.google.com/policies.html#restrictions, the content of this document is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License available at: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ and code samples are licensed under the BSD license available at http://code.google.com/google bsd license.html." --Alvestrand (talk) 15:35, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Speculation

This article suggests that Dart might resemble Bracha’s language Newspeak, and goes on to speculate that “perhaps Dart will be something like Node.js without the deficiencies of JavaScript . . .”:

http://InformationWeek.com/news/development/web/231601140

Dan337 (talk) 23:49, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

The name of the language is 'Dart' not 'Google Dart'. I suggest the page name and title be changed. Donpdonp (talk) 16:17, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

done.--Boshomi (talk) 21:44, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

"not" a javascript killer?

According to the register this morning, "It's really not a JavaScript killer, insists author". http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/10/10/google_previews_dart/ I'm not an expert and this is a new topic, but I pass this on for information.Rob Burbidge (talk) 09:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

"Competitive landscape"

Why is the "Competitive landscape" section not just called "Criticism" as with many other Wikipedia articles? It contains nothing but criticism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nottrobin (talk • contribs) 22:11, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. I have made the change. Hexagonalpedia (talk) 00:09, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Optional Type

I noticed that there is no Wiki article on optional type. Perhaps it would be useful to provide a link to an article on it? 192.5.109.34 (talk) 20:15, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Why is there a "Criticism" section?

The section expresses the opinion of people who are threatened by the Dart Language and the section goal's is to dissuade readers from adopting Dart. Personal opinions don't belong on this page.

Why was the "Criticism" section deleted from this article?

Recently, I noticed that "criticism" section of this article was removed. I think it should have been kept - it stated the opinion of the Javascript language's designer (Brendan Eich), as well as that of Microsoft's development team, as well as some reasons for this criticism. Jarble (talk) 03:01, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

The "criticism" doesn't seem to be relevant or useful.

I agree. There is no reason to keep it there. It is just some random ranting by people that is directly hurt by Dart. It doesn't add any technical nor useful consideration to the article. Just useless speculation by people who have interests in keeping Dart away from their kingdom.

The statement from Microsoft's JavaScript team is pretty weird. Microsoft also created a replacement for JavaScript called TypeScript. Apparently Microsoft also thinks that JavaScript isn't good enough for writing bigger applications.

Oliver Hunt's statement is wrong. Dart is not like VBS. Unlike VBS, Dart is meant to work in every modern browser. You just have to compile it to JavaScript. It's pretty much like CoffeeScript, TypeScript, Python, or whatever else you can compile to JavaScript. Also, Dart is completely open.

Brendan Eich's statement is very similar to Oliver Hunt's. Programs written in Dart run just fine in Firefox. They also run fine in IE9+, Opera, Safari, or the current version of Chrome which doesn't support Dart yet. It's the same deal with CoffeeScript or TypeScript: browsers don't have to support those languages, you can use those languages either way. That's the primary selling point of those languages: you can use them today.

It is also quite funny especially when he says "never mind the political bad taste" ROTFL.

Douglas Crockford's statement doesn't even contain any criticism. He only said that if he were to create a programming language (which he has never done before), he wouldn't come up with something like Dart. He prefers prototypical inheritance over "classical" inheritance. Of course he wouldn't have come up with a language which uses classes. He doesn't like classes.

Not even one of those statements criticizes Dart the programming language. Only Crockford talked about the language itself, but he didn't criticize any feature or language design decisions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.91.134.149 (talk) 04:04, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

The above unsigned comment is very well said. In addition, I would add that the criticisms in the article come from sources with an axe to grind, and are far from neutral. I plan to replace this section with something quite different. Rochkind (talk) 14:29, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

In podcast

Dart was the subject of podcast FLOSS Weekly, episode 245, 2013-03-21. Perhaps this can be used as a source? --Mortense (talk) 11:38, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Smalltalk influence

According to this blog post: Why Not a Bytecode VM?, it would appear that Dart is also influenced by Smalltalk; “We also want to introduce web developers to the powerful live editing features that Smalltalk developers pioneered”. Is this valid enough a reason to add Smalltalk to the Influenced by list? Pacoup (talk) 01:15, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm not even sure that Dart does this. JavaScript already has the particularly simple edit-refresh-run cycle that's a large benefit of this approach, but Dart is (AFAIK) either just doing what JavaScript does (and so the Smalltalk influence is very indirect) or else there are some things that Smalltalk does in addition, but that neither JavaScript or (AFAIK) Dart approach. I don't see this as a clear or detailed statement of what's at issue, even if it's a sourced one. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:05, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Why is there a special heading just for Chrome Dev Editor and not any other editor?

Chrome Dev Editor is not at all section worthy. The Dart Editor itself should have it's own section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.104.180.60 (talk) 22:41, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

AKA Dash?

Isn't this the language that was known as "Dash" for a while? Does anybody know how the name "Dart" was chosen? --Lance E Sloan (talk) 19:15, 16 July 2015 (UTC)