Slashdot Mirror
Cocoa-Like JavaScript Framework Announced
TwilightSentry writes "Ars Technica reports that a group of developers has created an Objective-C-like extension to JavaScript along with a class library mirroring Cocoa. They've used these to release an impressive demo app called 280 Slides. The article notes, 'Whereas SproutCore seeks to "embrace the platform" by giving a Cocoa-like development model for developers already using HTML, CSS, and JavaScript to make a web app, Cappuccino and Objective-J take an entirely different approach. "Since Cappuccino runs entirely on the client, at run time, we're never actually generating HTML or CSS," says Boucher. "When you build an application in Cappuccino, you don't need to ever deal with HTML or CSS. All of your interface is designed in Objective-J and Cappuccino. Cappuccino focuses on application architecture more than anything else, like building applications that know how to save and open documents, or copy and paste. We also built a powerful graphics engine into Cappuccino, so you can make rich applications like 280 Slides."' The developers plan to release the framework and preprocessor as open source. No mention is made of a specific license."
Who wants to bet how long it will be before Google buys up the guys who made that presentation app?
It could certainly be a bit faster, but it's still damn impressive.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
>>I agree with you: Javascript is not technically the best solution to write such an application
And how exactly does JavaScript fall short?
A lot of programmers look down on it because of its poor start but in its current state its a perfectly capable programming language, even without superfluous v2 features. The biggest problem with web apps is supporting IE 6.
Know what I like about atheists? I've yet to meet one that believes God is on their side.
I agree with you: Javascript is not technically the best solution to write such an application (for now, let's see when JS2 comes out and will be implemented by all major browsers).
Why?
Because JavaScript doesn't (yet) support classes?
If that is the answer, then with all due respect I thoroughly disagree. JavaScript is an OO language, it just uses differential (or prototype-based) inheritance, rather than class-based inheritance. It's quite possible to write fully featured GUI apps using a language that adopts a differential inheritance model. I did that for many years on the Newton, using NewtonScript.
The Newton OS APIs (object prototypes) that went with NewtonScript worked just fine, and provided a GUI that was in a number of ways more advanced than Cocoa. Gave very decent performance on an extremely limited platform.
Personally I have yet to be convinced of the wisdom of including classes in JavaScript2 - it feels unnecessary to me.
" If you're not trying to write a high-performance scalable computing cluster app, or an operating system, or a fancy computer game, then bloat really isn't an issue."
Spend 20(+) years fixing other peoples code then get back to me on that one.
Need Mercedes parts ?
Did you even try the demo? On my dual-core Opteron with 4 gigs of RAM it was *painfully* slow. I can run Windows in Qemu, then run Office inside of that, and it would seem really fast compared to their demo. A little bloat here and there isn't an issue. When an app is so bloated and slow that it's unusable for anything practical, it's a real problem.
If I wanted to feel like I was building a presentation on an ancient 286, I would just dig one out of my closet
Also, until you're volunteering to buy the RAM for me, you can kindly shut the fuck up about how cheap it is. Thanks.
Maybe not
What browser I'm using shouldn't be relevant.
Well, it does. The "300% increase in javascript speed" browsers like to advertise with new versions actually means something. It's akin to a site using SVG or CSS3--except it does work with every browser, it's just slow.