> In article <47024d79$1@news.povray.org>, 
> nic### [at] gmailisthebestcom says...
>> Umm... Isn't that how things work on *any* loosely-typed language?
>>
>> var arr = [123, [12,34], "foo", /\s+public ?(.*)/g, new Sphere(1,2,3)];
>>
>> A valid Javascript array containing a number, another array, a string, a 
>> regular expression, and a Sphere (provided that the Sphere object was 
>> defined).
>>
> Well, all I know is that it wasn't, for what ever reason, possible with 
> the client. That *may* be due to the fact that Java is *not* normally 
> that loosely typed, or that some serious problem existed in ActiveScript 
> which seriously fracked it (since it relies a lot of that for every 
> language except Lua. Though, mind you, half the ActiveScript languages 
> seem to not follow spec anyway and suffer from bloody silly 
> inconsistencies even in how you instance them, never mind get them to do 
> anything after they are linked.)
> 

You're mixing up Java and Javascript (they have nothing to do, name 
similarity is apparently because of marketing reasons). Java is 
strongly-typed, Javascript is loosely-typed. Java is compiled into 
bytecode, Javascript is interpreted. Java has classes, Javascript has 
prototype-based OOP instead.

Post a reply to this message