There are many projects out there to compile language X to ES3 [see
appended list]. The growing popularity of these projects is at least
interesting.
I think some of the main motivations are programmers
are more comfortable/happier using some other language.
see browser ECMAScript as not advancing at an acceptable rate (for them).
see tools for other languages as better than what is available
for JavaScript.
want to use the same language both client-side and server-side and
pigs would need to fly before they would use ECMAScript on the
server-side.
cannot live without some language feature (e.g. classes, macros etc).
One great feature about ECMAScript as a compilation target is that
macros can be available in the source language and that defers the
need to add macros to ECMAScript.
Another feature of compiling to ECMAScript is that source code
languages can be developed at a rate faster than ECMAScript can be
standardized and new browsers with new features become widely adopted.
Some languages are harder to compile to ECMAScript than others because
ECMAScript does not have particular features. I don't mean sugary
syntax but actual language features (e.g. tail call elimination,
continuations, concurrency.)
Is there any direct interest in making ES-Harmony an easier
compilation target? Could making ES-Harmony a easier compilation
target be (partial) justification for feature addition to ES-Harmony?
There are many projects out there to compile language X to ES3 [see
appended list]. The growing popularity of these projects is at least
interesting.
I think some of the main motivations are programmers
1) are more comfortable/happier using some other language.
2) see browser ECMAScript as not advancing at an acceptable rate (for them).
3) see tools for other languages as better than what is available
for JavaScript.
4) want to use the same language both client-side and server-side and
pigs would need to fly before they would use ECMAScript on the
server-side.
5) cannot live without some language feature (e.g. classes, macros etc).
One great feature about ECMAScript as a compilation target is that
macros can be available in the source language and that defers the
need to add macros to ECMAScript.
Another feature of compiling to ECMAScript is that source code
languages can be developed at a rate faster than ECMAScript can be
standardized and new browsers with new features become widely adopted.
Some languages are harder to compile to ECMAScript than others because
ECMAScript does not have particular features. I don't mean sugary
syntax but actual language features (e.g. tail call elimination,
continuations, concurrency.)
Is there any direct interest in making ES-Harmony an easier
compilation target? Could making ES-Harmony a easier compilation
target be (partial) justification for feature addition to ES-Harmony?
Peter
----------------
Language X to ES3 Compilers
macro expansion
http://n01senet.blogspot.com/2006/10/jam-lisp-like-macros-for-javascript.html
ECMAScript4 to JavaScript 1.5
http://ecmascript4.com/
NarativeJavaScript to JavaScript
http://neilmix.com/narrativejs/doc/
Scheme to JavaScript
http://www-sop.inria.fr/mimosa/personnel/Florian.Loitsch/scheme2js/
Scheme to JavaScript
http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/jsscheme/
Common Lisp to JavaScript
http://common-lisp.net/project/parenscript/
Smalltalk to JavaScript
http://www.squeaksource.com/ST2JS/
Haskell to JavaScript
http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Yhc/Javascript/Brief_overview
OCaml to JavaScript
http://skydeck.com/blog/programming/ocamljs-ocaml-to-javascript-compiler/
Python to JavaScript
http://jtauber.com/blog/2006/05/23/primitive_python_version_of_gwt_working
Ruby to JavaScript
http://po-ru.com/diary/convert-ruby-to-javascript/
C# to JavaScript
http://projects.nikhilk.net/Projects/ScriptSharp.aspx
Java to JavaScript
http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/
Java to JavaScript
http://j2s.sourceforge.net/
Oberon Script to JavaScript
http://research.microsoft.com/research/pubs/view.aspx?type=technical+report&id=1094
haXe to JavaScript
http://haxe.org/
Links to JavaScript
http://groups.inf.ed.ac.uk/links/
Milescript to JavaScript
http://milescript.org/
Flapjax to JavaScript
http://www.flapjax-lang.org/
There are many projects out there to compile language X to ES3 [see appended list]. The growing popularity of these projects is at least interesting.
I think some of the main motivations are programmers
One great feature about ECMAScript as a compilation target is that macros can be available in the source language and that defers the need to add macros to ECMAScript.
Another feature of compiling to ECMAScript is that source code languages can be developed at a rate faster than ECMAScript can be standardized and new browsers with new features become widely adopted.
Some languages are harder to compile to ECMAScript than others because ECMAScript does not have particular features. I don't mean sugary syntax but actual language features (e.g. tail call elimination, continuations, concurrency.)
Is there any direct interest in making ES-Harmony an easier compilation target? Could making ES-Harmony a easier compilation target be (partial) justification for feature addition to ES-Harmony?
Peter
Language X to ES3 Compilers
macro expansion n01senet.blogspot.com/2006/10/jam-lisp-like-macros-for-javascript.html
ECMAScript4 to JavaScript 1.5 ecmascript4.com
NarativeJavaScript to JavaScript neilmix.com/narrativejs/doc
Scheme to JavaScript www-sop.inria.fr/mimosa/personnel/Florian.Loitsch/scheme2js
Scheme to JavaScript www.bluishcoder.co.nz/jsscheme
Common Lisp to JavaScript common-lisp.net/project/parenscript
Smalltalk to JavaScript www.squeaksource.com/ST2JS
Haskell to JavaScript haskell.org/haskellwiki/Yhc/Javascript/Brief_overview
OCaml to JavaScript skydeck.com/blog/programming/ocamljs-ocaml-to-javascript-compiler
Python to JavaScript jtauber.com/blog/2006/05/23/primitive_python_version_of_gwt_working
Ruby to JavaScript po-ru.com/diary/convert-ruby-to-javascript
C# to JavaScript projects.nikhilk.net/Projects/ScriptSharp.aspx
Java to JavaScript code.google.com/webtoolkit
Java to JavaScript j2s.sourceforge.net
Oberon Script to JavaScript research.microsoft.com/research/pubs/view.aspx?type=technical+report&id=1094
haXe to JavaScript haxe.org
Links to JavaScript groups.inf.ed.ac.uk/links
Milescript to JavaScript milescript.org
Flapjax to JavaScript www.flapjax-lang.org
There are many projects out there to compile language X to ES3 [see appended list]. The growing popularity of these projects is at least interesting. I think some of the main motivations are programmers 1) are more comfortable/happier using some other language. 2) see browser ECMAScript as not advancing at an acceptable rate (for them). 3) see tools for other languages as better than what is available for JavaScript. 4) want to use the same language both client-side and server-side and pigs would need to fly before they would use ECMAScript on the server-side. 5) cannot live without some language feature (e.g. classes, macros etc). One great feature about ECMAScript as a compilation target is that macros can be available in the source language and that defers the need to add macros to ECMAScript. Another feature of compiling to ECMAScript is that source code languages can be developed at a rate faster than ECMAScript can be standardized and new browsers with new features become widely adopted. Some languages are harder to compile to ECMAScript than others because ECMAScript does not have particular features. I don't mean sugary syntax but actual language features (e.g. tail call elimination, continuations, concurrency.) Is there any direct interest in making ES-Harmony an easier compilation target? Could making ES-Harmony a easier compilation target be (partial) justification for feature addition to ES-Harmony? Peter ---------------- Language X to ES3 Compilers macro expansion http://n01senet.blogspot.com/2006/10/jam-lisp-like-macros-for-javascript.html ECMAScript4 to JavaScript 1.5 http://ecmascript4.com/ NarativeJavaScript to JavaScript http://neilmix.com/narrativejs/doc/ Scheme to JavaScript http://www-sop.inria.fr/mimosa/personnel/Florian.Loitsch/scheme2js/ Scheme to JavaScript http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/jsscheme/ Common Lisp to JavaScript http://common-lisp.net/project/parenscript/ Smalltalk to JavaScript http://www.squeaksource.com/ST2JS/ Haskell to JavaScript http://haskell.org/haskellwiki/Yhc/Javascript/Brief_overview OCaml to JavaScript http://skydeck.com/blog/programming/ocamljs-ocaml-to-javascript-compiler/ Python to JavaScript http://jtauber.com/blog/2006/05/23/primitive_python_version_of_gwt_working Ruby to JavaScript http://po-ru.com/diary/convert-ruby-to-javascript/ C# to JavaScript http://projects.nikhilk.net/Projects/ScriptSharp.aspx Java to JavaScript http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/ Java to JavaScript http://j2s.sourceforge.net/ Oberon Script to JavaScript http://research.microsoft.com/research/pubs/view.aspx?type=technical+report&id=1094 haXe to JavaScript http://haxe.org/ Links to JavaScript http://groups.inf.ed.ac.uk/links/ Milescript to JavaScript http://milescript.org/ Flapjax to JavaScript http://www.flapjax-lang.org/