Similarly, it is the “trivially easy” features of JavaScript that makes it far more suitable for exploring new solutions than, for the sake of argument, Java. Low cost of implementation leads to a lower cost of disposal. Frequent disposal can lead to far better solutions than the mistaken assumption that all problems can be defined and solved up front.

But, the fictional programmer in my head may say, then any sane coder would want to re-implement the hacked JavaScript solution. I don’t see any lego cars on the road.

Not so, I retort. The beauty of JavaScript is that it’s flexibility means that it is also flexible enough to be restricted. It generally seems to be the case that writing code to restrict code/program behaviour takes less time than writing code to make it more flexible (compare, for example, code to restrict values in a type to implementing a new type).

Finally, the fun part becomes very important for the (nebulous term alert) vibrancy of a language. If it’s fun to program with, it’s fun to explore with. From that I’d say it’s reasonable to propose that a fun language will have a broader range of good and bad solutions known. More choices of known solutions are, I would say, a very good thing. Programming problems of a non-trivial scale are rarely identical. Having more fodder for thought processes is good. Otherwise everything is a nail and the language is the hammer.

The argument that a poor language choice will force one to write better crafted code is more full of holes than an Italian cruise ship.

I do like the fact that after listing a whole host of faults you then say this is “fit for purpose”, surely this is an oxymoron (or something similar, I never really got to grips with the English language).

Also programming is fun and always has been, even before computers were invented learning about the turing machine, definite finite automata and the like still floats my boat and is STILL the basic foundation for solid understanding of programming principles. Recently a friend asked me to teach them how to program they had some things working and wanted to know how to make them better. Looking at the code it was a mash-up of code copied from many different google searches slapped together with some bailing twine and sticky back plastic that had been “nailed in the upright position”. In a word it was bad, unmaintainable and worked in a very limited number of cases. I’ve seen a lot of this working with contractors that are so eager to earn money and move onto the next project that they never see the destruction chaos and mayhem that they leave behind. Yes people should be interested in being able to make cute little games with minimal effort and this is where javascript comes in, the trouble is that when a toy (such as lego) is then used to solve real life problems the temptation to stick some shit together is overwhelming.

javascript is a toy language, toys are for children, when I was a child I thought as a child played as a child and programmed as a child, but when I grew up I realised it was time to put away childish things.

I do like javascript, but everything in its place, cute quirky web apps and nice slick gui components YES, but a web server HEEELLLLLL NNNOOOO!

Thank you! Works great!

Thanks for the command prompt step. This allowed me to remove it from a client’s machine that it was causing a runtime error on.

I did not have windows search listed in add remove programs.

I work on a large (java) code base. It has many, many, “bogus” tests. E.g. unit-tests that have no assert’s at all. Tests that have EasyMock.replay() but no EasyMock.verify(). Presumably these were written by monkeys who were taking a break from typing Shakespeare.

I’d like to find, or create a static analysis tool that can parse the java code for the test classes, and find these bogus methods (at least with some reasonably high degree of probability).

Any suggestions? Has anyone been down this road before?

And I just do not see anything out there, that could fill the gap flex is leaving … and I have been looking hard. One thing I know for sure though: I am not going to bet on anything else than a truly community driven and owned technology.

Are you going to give a summary on your haXe experiments?