Yellow is the New Blog

In response to: XPages - The Good, The Bad and the UGLY - II

I'm gonna have to disagree with both of you. JavaScript doesn't need classes because of closures... if you don't know what closures are, now would be an excellent time to find out. Nathan's spot on about Squawk: there's maybe a dozen lines of SSJS; and in every case it's just instantiating a Java object and calling a couple of its methods. But to be honest, all the apps I'm writing now include less and less custom Java classes because I'm sprinkling in calls to standard Java classes where I need them (same goes for @Functions, though that too is decreasing), and everything else is being handled in typical JS syntax. It's a very misunderstood language... far more powerful than its reputation (which is primarily the fault of lazy developers). Expect a followup post on my blog about what a JS "class" looks like. :)