I always welcome constructive feedback. I honestly do not know what part of my post are you referring to in your first paragraph. Is it the fact that I called it LiveScript?
As far as I am aware the prototype that came out of Netscape was called Mocha that transformed to LiveScript and eventually to JavaScript. Correct me if I am wrong and I'll happily change the post.
So all the factors I listed for JS being popular/powerful do not matter and it gained popularity solely because it is run by a not for profit? I do see not-for-profit as another good selling point to JS but not the sole selling point. That being said, for-profit companies like FB created React and I would call it a good library.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I always welcome constructive feedback. I honestly do not know what part of my post are you referring to in your first paragraph. Is it the fact that I called it LiveScript?
As far as I am aware the prototype that came out of Netscape was called Mocha that transformed to LiveScript and eventually to JavaScript. Correct me if I am wrong and I'll happily change the post.
So all the factors I listed for JS being popular/powerful do not matter and it gained popularity solely because it is run by a not for profit? I do see not-for-profit as another good selling point to JS but not the sole selling point. That being said, for-profit companies like FB created React and I would call it a good library.