Dynamic languages vs. static languages.

dreamey — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 06:00:00 GMT

I recently stated doing some work with JavaScript as part of working on infoPath Forms Server. I realized that you can do some pretty powerful and cool things with JavaScript however the lack of strong types is a little hard to get used to.

In Java script you can do things like:

function TestFunction()

{

var myVariable = 33;

alert(i);

myVariable = CallBack;

myVariable();

}

function CallBack()

{

alert("CallBack");

}

In this example I create a variable named myVariable and assign the integer value 33 to it. Then I assign the value or location of the function CallBack to the variable myVariable.

I then invoke the function by treating it as a function i.e. myVariable().

This is pretty cool and very powerful. However, the problem comes when you start looking at a large complex code base. Since there are no types you can’t easily determine the type of a variable. What the InfoPath team has done is used a naming convention for the variables. This allows us to track the object back to a source file.

However, since this is still a non typed language and there is no easy way to use the right click style go to definition found in Visual Studio and other tools.

When learning a new code base tools like this make things much easier. Working in JavaScript is analogous to walking around a dark room looking for a marble.

If anyone has any hints or tips on navigating large JavaScript code base let me know your thoughts.

Don Reamey's InfoPath Weblog : Languages

Dynamic languages vs. static languages.