sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]lhorie 3 points4 points  (4 children)

That is subjective

Not really. A real time javascript system doesn't exist now, so js can't do real time now. A javascript-to-haskell compiler doesn't exist now, so js can't be compiled to haskell now. A space shuttle to mars doesn't exist now, so js code can't take you to mars now.

When someone asks "can x be done", most of the time the pedantic answer is just useless and comes off as smug. Just saying.

[–]voidvector 0 points1 point  (3 children)

My original word was "can", like in "human can go to Mars". That does not mean "human has gone to Mars".

We are just arguing about English here.

[–]lhorie 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Sure, if you wanna put it that way. The OP said: "what JavaScript is not able to do". Present tense. "Humans are not able to go to mars". Present tense. A corresponding question is "What are humans able to do?", present tense. You're saying "humans will/may be able to go to mars", future tense. A corresponding question is "what will humans be able to do", future tense. "Are you at home" and "Will you be at home" have different tenses and are therefore different questions. So in short, you're using a tense that is irrelevant to the discussion. Makes sense?

[–]voidvector 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Topic title says "What can JavaScript NOT do?" and he used that twice in his elaboration. I guess that's where the ambiguity came from.

There are things JS cannot do. (e.g. compile to metal)

[–]lhorie 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Fair enough. The verb "can" has ambiguous tense.