darrelross.java at gmail.com
Wed Jun 6 20:18:02 UTC 2018
If we remove Nashorn are we seeking to replace with something else (like
I would be much more willing to give up Nashorn if it was going to be
replaced with something better, but I have worked on projects that would
have failed had we not been able to utilize Nashorn/Rhino.
opinion, an argument to drop support. Tools like Babel exist to help make
the quickly changing landscape easier to navigate. I think a much stronger
solution would be to find ways to allow users to use these tools rather
than cut support altogether.
toolbox. All a user needs to have installed is a browser to run it. Java
being able to run it makes it a much stronger platform. I am not saying
Java should seek to compete with Node, and would argue that a JS
application should probably not be run on the JRE, but there are strong use
cases for a hybrid approach.
If I am misreading the JEP please clarify. But dropping a feature that
already exists, unless its existence prevents future development and
features, is hardly ever a good idea.
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 12:16 PM, <mark.reinhold at oracle.com> wrote:
> - Mark
More information about the jdk-dev