What is ironic that the two leading JS replacements actually manage to be orthogonal - Typescript adds extra verbiage and Coffeescript attempts to strip out the verbiage.
As for Dart, I think Google spooked devs by intending to add a Dart VM to Chrome. Even if it could compile into JS, it sent the message that their intention was to replace JS with this other thing or run the two side by side. It's not the first time a company has tried to do this - VBscript in IE was another example.
In the X Window System core protocol, only four kinds of packets are sent, asynchronously, over the network: requests, replies, events, and errors.
That whole request / reply bit sailed over your head I see. The wire might be asynchronous but Xlib, the library that virtually all client code uses is filled with synchronous code that sends the request and waits for the reply. e.g. call XGetWindowAttributes and it will block until the response comes back.
There have been attempts to use xcb instead which is an async API but it turns out writing async code is hard, particularly when dealing with legacy code and an arcane windowing system that sends out a storm of messages. It's not hard to find xcb backend projects that have floundered.
It is called a pixmap.
A pixmap is not a surface. A surface is a texture under the management of a GPU (or software emulation of a GPU). X has no concept of surface. It is damage based windowing system. Hence the reason for extensions to work through this.
I am not crying. In fact, I am happy with X. I just point out that I don't see how Wayland has *anything* to offer for a desktop user. Not even performance. But it has disadvantages: And breaking compatibility is most serious one. XWayland only solves one direction (running X clients on Wayland) and not the other (running Wayland clients on X). Finally, there are already mobile devices with Wayland without XWayland, e.g. Jolla. It breaks compatibility with the excellent N9, which is really stupid.
If you don't see why it has anything to offer I suggest you look at the Wayland website where it explains in detail why X is broken. If virtually every X developer can see the need then I don't see why others can't.
the "space" it's eating is completely unusable for any other purpose. the binary exists in
The point is that partition would be 30MB smaller if it didn't contain the Facebook in the first place. Throw in twitter, some crappy mobile office suite, some antivirus software, some cloud save service and a bunch of other junk and it might be closer to 100MB of wasted space.
no you don't see above.
Yes it does. 30MB masked out and another 30MB+ for the replacement. That's just one app that I assume most people would keep.
the existence of an APK installed into
Of course it does. The network operator (or whomever they contract to support their phones) have to receive a (tested) firmware update image from the manufacturer, extract it, throw in all their own changes & apps, compress it, test it again, and roll it out. That could add weeks or months to the process. It quite obviously requires more effort to test, and it reduces the chances that you'll get updates at all - perhaps Vodafone or whoever only supports a phone for 18 months even if the manufacturer is pushing out more updates or security fixes.
First, one can extend X11 fairly easily, this has been done in the past. Second, X11 already has asynchronous IPC.
First, you don't extend X, you work around it and leave one more bit of dead code to be maintained forever. Second, it is not async.
Again: bullshit. X11 can do take advantage of the hardware in exactly the same way as Wayland
Sorry you're lying. X11 has no concept of surfaces. The only way of taking advantage of the hardware is to write an extension that composites the scene for X11 and hands it back to X11 to page flip. So X11 is just a 3rd wheel that involves extra context switches for no reason at all.
I don't want RDP. RDP is not compatible with X. RDP is also a propriertary protocol fron Microsoft with a core standardized by the ITU. I sure hell to not want this as a replacement for X.
Oh boo hoo then implement something else.
Yes, implement X. Then come back.
Run X over wayland if you're so desperate for some crappy broken network protocol. VNC, RDP and others are more efficient.
I am not playing games. I want my new applications to work with old display servers and old applications to work with new servers.
And Wayland stops you how? Run X11 over wayland and stop crying.
And of course all that baked in crapware means you won't be getting firmware / security updates for your phone in a timely fashion, if ever.
Apart from that choice is good. Personally I prefer the vanilla experience, or the CM one (which is a relatively light enhancements). The worst replacement I've seen is the one from Huawei which decided that the all apps view and the personizable desktops should be combined into a single thing creating the most unusable experience I've seen in any smart phone.
Marriage is the triumph of imagination over intelligence. Second marriage is the triumph of hope over experience.