1. 23
  1. 4

    This is a little tangential but, I often fantasize about an alternate timeline where a LISP-style language got popular instead of PHP or especially where something like ClojureScript took JavaScript’s place in our timeline, and how much more enthusiastic I would be about modern software development had that happened. It’s sort of like, at least for the type of software I’d be developing, all roads lead to JavaScript and although I’ve been using it for 20 years I (hate?) it and I don’t see that changing.

    1. 5

      We could have lived in the alternative universe where JavaScript was still Mocha/LiveScript, had Lisp syntax, and was exactly the same language love to hate otherwise. Surprisingly plausible.

      1. 2

        Also if you just ignore the warts of JS-the-language I’m not sure that JS-the-ecosystem would’ve looked a lot better. I mean, we could hope, but I think it’s been a victim of its success and many solutions have been thought out by people without a lot of experience (because it’s so beginner friendly, which is good) and it’s basically the same thing as with PHP back then. Easy entry -> many beginners -> bad libraries get traction -> etc.pp

      2. 3

        Imagine if some exec at Mozilla didn’t insist that JavaScript had to have C style syntax to be familiar. Lisp would’ve been the most commonly used language today.

        1. 5

          Just because it’d be a Lisp doesn’t mean it’d be a good Lisp. (See: Emacs)

          1. 2

            Sure, but the syntax would’ve certainly been cleaner and less confusing than C inspired syntax with Lisp semantics. Js would’ve also introduced a lot of programmers to s-expressions which would’ve likely led to more s-expression based languages in the wild. Finally, we could’ve had a single unified syntax for markup, styling, and logic leveraging s-expressions.

          2. 4

            Exec at Netscape, not Mozilla.