Google’s Alex Russell on JavaScript versus Dart

Its good to see that not everyone at Google thinks that JavaScript “not viable in the long term” [1]. Quoting the highlights of a blog post by Alex Russell [via @MunichJS]:

There’s very little public information yet about Dart (nee, Dash), and as I’m not on Lars’ team I can’t comment about it.
[...]
[Several Google employees] and I attend TC39 meetings, work on implementations, and try to push JS forward in good faith. And boy, does it need a push.
[...]
It’s hard to square this sort of wild enthusiasm for “raw” JavaScript with what’s in the leaked memo, and I can only beg for some amount of understanding. As committed and enthusiastic as I am about the prospects for JavaScript, others are just as enthused about Dart. Google is big, can do many things at once, and often isn’t of one mind. What we do agree on is that we’re trying to make things better the best we know how. Anyone who watches Google long enough should anticipate that we often have different ideas about what that means. For my part, then, consider me and my team to be committed JS partisans for as long as we think we can make a difference.
[...]
Whatever you might think about programming languages for the browser, let me assure you of one thing: your problem isn’t the language. Not really, anyway. We’ve made good progress in the last year repairing some of the seams between JS and DOM ... But it’s only the beginning. The DOM is in terrible shape, and not due to implementation differences.

Related reading:

1. Google Dart to “ultimately ... replace JavaScript”
2. A brief history of ECMAScript versions (including Harmony and ES.next)
3. ECMAScript.next: the “TXJS” update by Eich