I haven't kept up with Dart, as I kinda fail to see the point right now, so can you elaborate a bit on how you think the current design is going against Gilad Bracha's convictions?
Language evolution is an interesting thing, especially when you've got corporate influence, second system effect etc.
Or simply the need to add stuff, as languages are considered just another product, and otherwise you're considered "stale" in today's market. Weird.
Interesting. I’m a fan of Gilads work, and have a strong admiration for Lars Bak who were both involved in 1.0. I followed it cursorily from time to time and thought it looked intriguing. I had a number of colleagues from the Smalltalk industry that went to work on it.
They’ve all left now (I don’t know what Lars’ involvement is anymore?).
But I was curious about Dart for a cross platform app and learned Dart 2.0 and was wholeheartedly let down. I just felt like I was staring at a Java dialect. The “sanctioned” tutorial I watched introduced classes as a “way of organizing code” which I guess could abstractly be said to be true, but IMO misses the mark entirely.
Anyway, I found Dart 2.0 to be very uninteresting. Very safe and traditional and boring. Maybe I need to relook closer to try and see what you’re seeing that I did not.
don't read too much into what I said, I barely read the async/concurrent primitives they made, it felt different and interesting. I came with the impression that it would be a cuter java (like you somehow) but these bits caught my brain by surprise.
Until recently[0] Dart had pervasive nullability, that is, all types `T` are implicity `Option(T)`. Which in my view was completely unacceptable even in 2011 when it was initially released.
No idea, and I wasn't judging, it's just that on average you'll see 12 languages on articles / news / threads before you see mention of Dart. I heard flutter was solid and quite used but "socially" the mentions are rare.
Hopefully not in the same way that Dart turned out to be so "exciting and interesting" :)