> Some substantial portion of AngularJS devs are unhappy.
Define "substantial". I've seen some complaints here that AngularDart has, and will, take away from AngularJS, which, again, is unsubstantiated. It's counter to the evidence and the likelihood that the groups working together will make both better.
> I'm not arguing for Dart's existence here, I'm saying Dart has absolutely no chance of securing the browser's runtime over javascript.
Uh, you've expressed "cynicism [...] over Google's waste of time" and called Dart "pretty flawed", which you haven't substantiated yet. If your were merely expressing skepticism over Dart "securing the browser's runtime over javascript", there wouldn't be a discussion here. Brendan Eich did that for you a long time ago. I'd contend that it doesn't really matter as long as dart2js can fulfill its goals; however, I'd still maintain a wait-and-see attitude about how we'll see DartVM used. There are some very interesting possibilities.
> 173KB. This is ridiculous.
Substance! Thank you. Dart is pre-1.0. It's being worked on. Also, notice at the bottom of that page:
We want your help, especially if you can make update
@MirrorsUsed in main.dart to generate a smaller binary.
> Get over it or walk away.
No, I won't. The attitude isn't conducive to civil discourse and not welcome here so I'll continue calling it out where I see it. I'll take the upvotes as confirmation that others agree with me.
You've got your unsubstantiated opinions and will continue making these "sweeping" claims so there's no point in continuing here. It leaves little room for meaningful discussion, unfortunately.
It's telling, to me, that the first argument of mine you take seriously you handwave over by vaguely saying it will get better and it can be fixed.
I'd place a bet that Dart is about as good as it is ever going to be.
>I'll take the upvotes as confirmation that others agree with me.
Sorry to disappoint you, but I've got upvotes, too.
>The attitude isn't conducive to civil discourse and not welcome here so I'll continue calling it out where I see it.
Whatever floats your pompous self-righteous boat.
I may be curt, strident, and critical, but you don't really have high ground when it comes to condescension. You went straight to childish insults. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6679901
When I disagree with someone I don't directly call them stupid or immature. (Well, usually.) I may speak and act as if something I believe strongly is obvious, and I may not mask my disdain for the ideas expressed. There's nothing wrong with being wrong, but I'm not going to hide the fact that I think you're wrong.
You seem to have a problem that someone a) disagrees with you, and b) says so confidently and forcefully. Again, get over it or walk away. If I'm so wrong and so boorish, you are under no contract to continue.
You can't change me and I am not your responsibility.
Fortunately I think you've finally clued in ("so there's no point in continuing here"). I've certainly spent enough time on this. Later.
> Whatever floats your pompous self-righteous boat.
> I may be curt, strident, and critical, but you don't really have high ground when it comes to condescension. You went straight to childish insults. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6679901
Define "substantial". I've seen some complaints here that AngularDart has, and will, take away from AngularJS, which, again, is unsubstantiated. It's counter to the evidence and the likelihood that the groups working together will make both better.
> I'm not arguing for Dart's existence here, I'm saying Dart has absolutely no chance of securing the browser's runtime over javascript.
Uh, you've expressed "cynicism [...] over Google's waste of time" and called Dart "pretty flawed", which you haven't substantiated yet. If your were merely expressing skepticism over Dart "securing the browser's runtime over javascript", there wouldn't be a discussion here. Brendan Eich did that for you a long time ago. I'd contend that it doesn't really matter as long as dart2js can fulfill its goals; however, I'd still maintain a wait-and-see attitude about how we'll see DartVM used. There are some very interesting possibilities.
> 173KB. This is ridiculous.
Substance! Thank you. Dart is pre-1.0. It's being worked on. Also, notice at the bottom of that page:
> Get over it or walk away.No, I won't. The attitude isn't conducive to civil discourse and not welcome here so I'll continue calling it out where I see it. I'll take the upvotes as confirmation that others agree with me.
You've got your unsubstantiated opinions and will continue making these "sweeping" claims so there's no point in continuing here. It leaves little room for meaningful discussion, unfortunately.