Une intervention d'oncle Douglas Crockford, c'est toujours un succès.
Les retardataires peuvent se tourner vers :
- Theory of the DOM, il y a des notes ici
J'aime bien Crockford car il n'a pas la langue dans sa poche et parce qu'il est grave quotable :)
Morceaux choisis de la transcription avec des liens ajoutés par moi. Si vous voulez un truc moins lourd, regardez les slides de la présentation.
A propos du process de standardisation
The committee had been working for several years pursuing a design that had begun at Netscape in 1999. That project had been abandoned, but was restarted again because of the big interest in Ajax.
All this time ECMA was really worried, because ECMAScript is the most successful product at ECMA. [...] ECMA demands consensus, and properly so. So the ECMA Secretary General and the ECMA President both began attending our meetings, which was really nice because with that adult supervision there, everybody started behaving more. Civility was restored and we were able to agree on more stuff.
A propos d'ES5
While that was going on, we were able to finish ES3.1 [...]. It is now a candidate to become the fifth edition of ECMAScript. We chose not to call it the fourth edition because there's an understanding in the world about what ES4 is, and what we were doing was nothing like that. So to avoid that confusion we skipped to the next whole number, so it's ES5. That goes before the General Assembly in December and I'm optimistic that it will be approved then. If so, it will become the next ECMAScript standard.
One company has stated its intention to vote against it, and that company is IBM. The issue is decimal arithmetic.
Et oui, le fameux Floating Point. S'ensuit une longue partie technique à propos de l'implémentation de la représentation des nombres à virgule flottante dans ECMAScript où l'on aborde l'IEEE 754, ses révisions et les multiples pistes étudiées pour améliorer ce point. Et puis on peut lire une petite pointe d'humour :
So it was really difficult to write programs that would be portable across all of those computers. Today is doesn't much matter because it's all Intel, so who cares...
A propos de la prochaine évolution du langage, ES6, nom de code Harmony
We're not calling it ES6 because we want to avoid names which suggest that something is inevitable, or pre-approved, or has some status which it has not earned yet, such as HTML 5 or something like that.
...et des wannabe ninjas (N.B. pire que des wannabe blogueurs) :
[...] there's a lot of pressure on us to suck less, which turns out to be really hard to do. There are so many wannabe ninjas out there who are taking the bad parts and the awful parts and showing how they can do all these clever things with them, and doing that means that we can't remove those awful features. Now, you could argue that they deserve to have their programs broken, or their legs broken...
They've been asking us to do things like add 'goto' to the language. [...] I don't want to be bringing it back, I think that would be a terrible thing.
Basically, we'll have Caja's strength native in the language itself, which would be a wonderful thing.
We still have to fix the DOM, because the DOM is still crap, but at least there's a good chance we can fix the language now. The DOM, incidentally, is going in exactly the opposite direction of what we need in order to make it safe for all of us, so that's another problem.
A propos des brevets logiciels
So one of the lessons is that patents and open systems are not compatible. I think the solution to that incompatibility is to close the Patent Office.
The success of an enterprise should depend on the quality of its goods and services and its ability to execute efficiently, and not on a capricious Government office. The patent system made sense in the 18th and 19th century, it really did. They helped us to become a very innovative country, made us very good in manufacturing and process, but it has long outlived its usefulness and we need to change it. Patents can be attractive in that if you can get a patent and then snag a competitor with it, you can get some free money, and that's attractive. But you can get snagged on someone else's patent, and then you have to pay it back. There's a good chance that both of you are going to get snagged by a patent troll. So it's gambling, basically. It's a casino, and you hope that at the end of the day you win, but in the long term you lose. Nobody wins except the lawyers.
A propos d'HTML5