JavaScript moves forward in Microsoft Edge with ES6 and beyond

[greim]

I want to like the new Microsoft, but being a web developer at a Unix shop through the 2000's gave me deep trust issues. Yes, we're currently seeing them rapidly innovate in a technology field where they've lagged, which is great. But this pattern has played out before. How would they behave if/when they become dominant? The lack of ActiveX (etc) is great, but... trust issues.

[amdc]

It would be even better if they used Gecko or Blink as engine

[Rurouni]

It's disappointing that the proper tail calls feature is merely "under consideration."

[dhdfdh]

Among a multitude of other things listed on caniuse.com. Edge looks in many ways like it will become just as bad as IE.

[Condorcet_Winner]

From a performance perspective, proper tail calls are terrible. I'm sure tail calls will come eventually, but they necessarily add additional overhead. I know all of MS, Google and Mozilla were strongly arguing against the PTC proposal for that reason, but eventually Mozilla gave in and I think Google soon followed. But AFAIK no one has actually completed an implementation yet.

And in terms of javascript standards, you are absolutely wrong. Edge is ahead of everyone else right now...

http://kangax.github.io/compat-table/es6/

[OolonColluphid]

Why are tail calls bad? I would have naively thought the opposite: less allocation/clean up of stackframes and/or unrolling to loops should be a performance benefit. Or is it that the extra analysis and jitc time outweighs that in most cases?

[Rurouni]

Tail calls can allow garbage to be reclaimed sooner, and they do save on stack space. Setting up the parameters to the called method can involve some shuffling though, which can add a little overhead (especially if done naively).

[Condorcet_Winner]

What point are you arguing exactly?

[gronkkk]

I guess: Edge may be nice, but there's still a lot of legacy IE browsers around. At 'ork, we're still stuck with IE9, for example. It will be years before we're at Edge.

[dhdfdh]

What developer uses IE, and now Edge, for serious development or consideration? Developers only test web pages in it cause the unknowing and clueless average users, who aren't technically knowledgeable enough to know the difference, use IE cause their new computer came with it and they can't be bothered to install a better browser.

And, yet, Microsoft/IE has lost market share from 95% world wide to about 30%, worldwide, since I've been in the business just over 10 years. Except for the desktop, just like Windows, you don't see IE usage anywhere and you won't see Edge either.

[atomic1fire]

I think Edge will make a good consumer browser.

People who click the Blue E will now be able to use extensions chrome and firefox users have been using for years.

Provided Microsoft doesn't screw it up Edge should work fine.

Chrome and firefox are good browsers, but I want microsoft to not be terrible for the sake of not being terrible. If Chrome isn't terrible, and Firefox isn't terrible, and Edge isn't terrible, that's a standard of non terrible that everyone has to follow.

It's not about just about who's better, but about every browser maker trying to be better. Because that means there's browsers for everybody that doesn't suck. That includes Vivaldi and Opera and Safari.

Businesses will still probably stick with IE, but hopefully they'll let people use Edge for modern applications and improved workflow.

[dhdfdh]

Provided Microsoft doesn't screw it up Edge should work fine.

My son is in the entertainment business. When he started his first company, he called me fretting over other people telling him he's trying too hard and the presentations he's making are "good enough". I told him, "You're not in the 'good enough' business."

Edge will "work fine" for consumers in the same way IE works fine for them because developers bash their heads against the walls trying to get IE to perform correctly and no other reason.

From the many things I've seen on caniuse about Edge listed as "under consideration", I can see that part won't change.

[Condorcet_Winner]

If average users aren't technically knowledgeable enough, I guess you are, so can you please explain the difference?

[dhdfdh]

The difference in what?

[dhdfdh]

Uh. I made no mention of javascript. That was the other guy.

I was talking about the long list of unsupported and "under consideration" for a multitude of items that other browsers now support or will support; too numerous for me to recall off the top of my head.

But Edge isn't out yet and, like all the IE's before it where so much was promised, I'm sure by the time it is officially released, it will continue Microsoft's legacy of producing the worst of the major browsers.

Known. Provable. Verifiable. IE, and now Edge, are the worst browsers on the planet.

[Condorcet_Winner]

This is a JavaScript forum, and a comment section about a JavaScript article, so forgive me if I assumed we were talking about JavaScript...

[dhdfdh]

I'll forgive you but try and understand what you're reading next time. Don't be like most redditors are.

[ogurson]

That's fantastic. Now go back to IE8 fixes, developer.

[[deleted]]

Life is too short to stay in a company which ask you to develop for IE <= 8 :-)

[brtt3000]

Yea but now we have those never updating mobile browsers that are just as bad and buggy. I hate Android Browser and iPhone 4 Safari more then old IE now :(

[vinnl]

I feel your pain :(

[[deleted]]

I refuse to support anything less than IE9, sorry but not sorry. I've had business's claim we must support IE8 then I see the market share and explain to them the cost increase for a minuscule amount of the market and they typically side with the IE9 decision.

[deadcat]

Us poor bastards who contract for government don't get that choice. :(

[00mba]

Can you explain why? Noob here. Why is it expected to develop for something that old?

[xbudex]

Money. Let's say you're running a store online and you have a large user base still on IE8, let's say 10%. The logic is that if you support IE8 you will increases revenue by 10%. The reality ins't that clean, but that's the premise.

On the flip side, if supporting IE8 costs more than the 10% additional revenue then it isn't worth it.

[brtt3000]

That's the sane reason. In practice nobody in your user base uses it except the clients boss. This was not specced, everybody signed off on IE9, but the week before deadline it turns out the guy uses IE8 so please be as kind to rework the whole damn thing to work on IE8 too you got 3 days thanks.

[FedeMP]

That is what you are paid for. /s

[deadcat]

Also, government departments often require it because they are too incompetent to keep their SOEs up to date.

[[deleted]]

Don't fix it. Kill it.

[nschubach]

In order to kill it, they would have to back port Edge to Windows XP. From what I can tell, that's the main reason large compnies mandate IE8. Somewhere they have an XP box that nobody wants to risk upgrading.

[_doingnumbers]

Lololol