Dart 1.0 Released

stoolpigeon writes "Yesterday marked the release of Dart SDK 1.0, a cross-browser, open source toolkit for structured web applications. The Dart SDK 1.0 includes everything you need to write structured web applications: a simple yet powerful programming language, robust tools, and comprehensive core libraries. The language has been somewhat controversial, but Google continues to move it forward." Reader slack_justyb adds some more detail: "The new release brings a much tighter dart2js compiler reducing overall JavaScript output up to 40%; Dartium — a version of Google Chrome that has the DartVM in addition to the JavaScript VM as native to the browser; PUB, a package manager for Dart add-ons; and several favorite 3rd party plug-ins that now come out-of-box, in addition to a lot of work for Dart server-side tools that can work to automate server side tasks and help in the construction of web pages. However Dart has many critics not only from the IE and Apple camps, as one would guess, but from the Firefox and Opera camps as well. In addition to the low adoption of Dart from third parties there are some asking where does Dart go from here? Especially considering that Google is one of the strongest pushers for EcmaScript 6."

Comments

It's a good idea to try it.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you've used JS in the past you'll see immediately why DART is so welcome. It's actually SANE!

My productivity is probably 200% greater in DART then JS. But don't take my word for it, I'm jsut an ana coward!

Re:It's a good idea to try it.

[aztracker1]

I'm not sure what you are referring to... for the most part extensions to JS the language have been fairly limited in scope... Some of the ES6 stuff being an exception, that has been a work in progress for some time. Most of the ES5 extensions can be shimmed in, and are often abstracted via utility libraries like lodash. The *language* of JavaScript is *NOT* the Document Object Model (DOM) of the browser... People tend to conflate the two, but it's just not the same thing.

And I'd learn to use it

[i kan reed]

If I hadn't come to absolutely loathe and distrust everything Google does over the course of the last few years.

Re:And I'd learn to use it

[Anonymous Coward]

This is totally Microsoft's VBscript for the web, and NaCL is their ActiveX. They're taking their role as the new Microsoft too seriously...

Re:Dart2JS is faster than JS?! whatever

[slack_justyb]

That is correct. When writing my piece for the story I wanted to ensure that I conveyed the correct idea that the Dart2JS compiler now generates up to 40% less JavaScript than previous versions of Dart2JS, not that the JavaScript itself that it generates is 40% faster.

As far as speed goes, there is all kinds of data on that facet on the Dart website. That will no less generate large amounts of debate about the figures presented by Google about Dart's performance. Just for the comedy of it, dart2js may generate less JavaScript, but will generate at least 60% more debate about its use.

If I was not clear on the whole point by this part of the story:

The new release brings a much tighter dart2js compiler reducing overall JavaScript output up to 40%

Then it was an honest mistake. I work with computers not the English language. :-)

Re:Cross browser?

[slack_justyb]

I think your arguments are pretty valid and I am by no stretch of the imagination a pro-Dart guy, but I believe that the "cross browser" claim comes from the olden days of cross platform languages. C/C++ had (has, just in case the past tense is a really bad choice) cross platform compilers they take C/C++ code and compile it to a language that the target platform understands. For example, C to ARM/x86/amd64/MIPS... compilers.

So my guess here, and it is just a guess, is that Google is using the same rationale to justify calling this a "cross browser" language, because the compiler can turn Dart into a language that can be understood by other browsers, much like a C compiler can compile into different paltforms. Arguments about if that is an accurate equation are totally justified and most likely will ensue hereafter. I'm just tossing up a guess as to why Google felt like that was an accurate statement.

Re:Cross browser?

[slim]

Any language that cross-compiles to JS is cross-browser. Correct.

Burned by GWT

[smist08]

After being burned by Google abandoning GWT, I would worry about adopting Dart. Won't Google just lose interest and abandon it after a year or two. Won't we just see a new project start up almost immediately for some newer better web language? Not sure I'd jump in on this one.

Re:Burned by GWT

[slack_justyb]

What? Do you mean 2.6.0 RC1? 2.6 looks to be more of a clean up of the 2.5.1 stuff rather than anything new. If anything the main thing that 2.6 brings is that they brought Java 7 into the picture. I wouldn't say that Google *has* abandon GWT, but they sure are making the common gestures of getting ready for a good old fashion keelhauling.

Now for just my opinion, GWT sucks. It's a messy looking API and lacks a ton of flexibility. For example, trying to implement custom UI for your web page is painful and totally unpleasant. More so than say making the same customer UI in Java Swing (which is pretty painful in of itself). In my opinion, and you my mod me down for it, is that anything that is worst to do in (insert framework here) than it is in Java should not exist.

Re:Cross browser?

[angel'o'sphere]

It has nothing to do with ActiveX at all.
ActiveX is a fancy *dll, which has full access to the System.
Dart is a sandboxed, either by the JavaScript Engine or the Dart Engine.