►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
Alan
you're
gonna
have
to
tell
us
a
little
bit
about
this
paper
and
the
conference
that
was
supposed
to
be
a
part
of
it
was
supposed
to
be
about
from
the
history
of
programming
language
conference.
That
happens
every
15
years,
but
it
couldn't
happen
this
year.
Tell
us
a
little
bit
about
this
fascinating
college.
That
makes
me
think
of
Tolkien
almost
yeah.
B
Well,
the
ACM
Association,
the
Computing
Machinery
holds
this
conference.
It's
every
12
to
15
years,
depending
on
how
they
get
organized
and
it
tries
to
get
into
the
conference
the
people
who
are
involved
with
major
programming
languages
to
write
down
and
document
how
that
language
came
to
be
to
provide
the
history
of
really
a
record
of
where
we
came
from,
and
so
as
we
go
forward.
People
understand
why
things
are
the
way
they
are
I
really.
A
B
B
But
people
come
into
it,
expecting
it
to
be
like
Java
and
a
visit
now
the
reason
that
actually
goes
back
to
the
really
very
origins
of
the
language,
because
in
1995
Netscape
was
trying
to
introduce
for
the
first
time
programming
into
the
capabilities
that
people
developing
web
pages
had
before
that
all
there
was
was
HTML,
declarative
HTML
and
they
thought
they
would
do
that
with
a
scripting
language.
But
at
the
same
time
that
happened.
Sun
Microsystems
came
along
with
the
Java
programming
language,
incited,
promoting
it
for
a
web
technology
and
so
they're
within
Netscape.
B
There
was
essentially
kind
of
this
race
between
the
simple
scripting
language.
In
this
more
complex
language
that
Sun
was
was
promoting
and
in
the
end
there
was
sort
of
an
internal
deep.
They
thought
that
said
what
we
will
do
both
will
incorporate
Java
and
but
will
also
have
this
simpler,
scripting
language
to
not
confuse
the
world,
although
it
ended
up
doing
just
the
opposite.
Well,
we'll
name
the
language
JavaScript
to
make
it
appear
that
they're
tightly
integrated
now.
A
You
wrote
in
the
you
wrote
in
the
book
that
Brendan
Eich
recalls
that
the
rallying
cry
articulated
by
Marc
Andreessen,
who
was
at
Netscape
at
the
time
and
is
famous
for
his
time.
There
was
saying
Netscape
plus
Java,
kills
Windows,
which
seems
to
me
now
kind
of
funny,
because
this
was
really
more
discussion.
If
you
think
of
back
about
really
the
kind
of
the
conversation
is
more
about
the
web.
Really,
you
know,
then
grand
Java
versus
windows.
B
It
was
Microsoft
in
Windows
that
was
dominating
all
of
personal
computing
and
stuff,
and
and
for
anything
new
to
be
in
the
news
that
wasn't
originating
with
with
Microsoft
was
very
unusual
and
very
difficult
to
accomplish
and
stuff.
And
so,
if
you
think,
of
the
web
as
a
new
different
sort
of
platform,
that
platform
to
some
degree
needed
to
compete
with
Windows.
And
so
that's
part
of
that
slogan.
Really.
A
B
That
was
really
probably
the
biggest
difference.
Java
was
its
world
unto
itself
it.
It
wasn't
really
native
to
the
web.
It
was
a
add-on
to
the
to
the
web
and
Suns.
You
know
their
slogan
was
right
once
one
every
run
everywhere
and
it
would
run
the
same
in
the
browser
as
it
would
on
a
desktop
as
it
would
on
a
server,
and
it
was
Java
that
was
defining
everything
about
the
world.
What
the
UI
would
be
like
how
you
interact
with
it
and
stuff
JavaScript
as
it
was
developed
at
Netscape.
B
It
was
highly
integrated
with
with
the
native
web
technologies.
The
first
versions
of
JavaScript,
the
only
way
to
include
JavaScript
code
was
computed
inline
within
your
HTML
files.
Right
there
was
script
tags
kanpei
JavaScript,
but
there
wasn't
the
option
to
point
off
at
an
external
file
containing
your
code.
It
had
to
be
there
right
in
line
and
then
the
interface
from
JavaScript
into
the
the
browser
technologies
into
HTML
Javascript
essentially
invented
the
Dom.
B
A
Now,
looking
back
on
it
before
we
get
into
the
discussions
about
the
standard,
because
things
were
developing
so
rapidly
at
this
time,
but
who
are
the
people
who
what
was
it
about
this
group
of
people
that
made
them
so
unique
for
the
time?
What
was
it
about
them
that
that
really
do,
you
think,
is
special,
because
javascript
and
some
respect
has
always
been
underrated.
But
this
was
actually
a
time
when
there
was
just
really
kind
of
intense
innovation
happening.
What
is
it
that
you
reflect
upon
about
this
group
of
people.
B
If
you
will,
as
the
web
there's
a
phrase
worse
than
better,
we
originated
from
Richard
P
Gabriel
who's,
one
of
the
developers
of
common
list,
but
he's
basically
saying
the
technologies
that
tend
to
succeed
are
those
that
are
just
barely
good
enough.
They're
good
enough
to
get
the
job
done,
but
they
don't
try
to
be
the
best
possible
solution
and
those
those
tend
to
be
the
most
successful.
A
No
worse
is
better,
and
this
also
was
a
time
when
you
know
now
that
you
were
opening
up.
You
know
the
browser
for
programming.
You
were
thinking
it
as
a
wet
as
a
web
stack,
but
there
were
all
kinds
of
different
developers
who
were
you
know,
building
things
and
are
all
had
to
work
together
right
and
so
now
you
have
this,
what
you
call
browser
game
theory
developing
and
how?
How
did
that
manifest
in
creating
a
standard
and
I
want
to
move
into
that
party?
This
person
really.
B
Started
with
as
soon
as
as
soon
as
JavaScript
was
introduced,
he
had
Microsoft,
who
was
trading
Internet
Explorer,
to
compete
with
with
Netscape
and
the
original
HTML
they
kind
of
had
to
be
the
same.
But
now
there
is
this
new
thing:
javascript
and
if
you
didn't,
if
Microsoft
didn't
have
JavaScript
in
in
IE
and
Internet
Explorer,
then
web
pages
that
use
JavaScript
wouldn't
work
in
Internet
Explorer.
So
so
you
know,
even
though
they
hated
the
idea.
B
Is
this
idea
that,
if
you
are,
if
you're
a
Netscape
or
a
Microsoft
or
a--
or
a
mozilla
or
even
a
google-
and
you
have
this
great
idea
for
browser
feature-
and
you
add
it
in
you-
add
a
new
part
of
the
technology,
scrap
staff
that
a
developer
could
use?
Well,
if
it's
only
in
your
browser,
nobody
trying
to
use
it
yeah.
A
And
it
really
then
laid
the
foundation
for
lava
but
technologies
that
we
see
today
and
how
we
think
about
activity
really
I
think
you
know
that
the
most
abstract
in
terms
of
how
you
think
about
you
know,
we
hear
a
lot
of
discussions
today
about
microservices.
You
know
all
the
components
that
must
have
work
together,
but
here
we're
talking
about
the
browser,
and
so
the
standards
became
incredibly
important,
so
you
say
that
they
were
essentially
what
we
started
to
see
was
like
this
bifurcation,
though
there
were
these
two
separate
design
efforts
that
were
happening.
B
Brendon
Knight
created
basically
created
the
first
versions
of
JavaScript
and
that
was
copied
fairly
closely
by
by
Microsoft
and
other
people
who
were
working
on
browsers
and
stuff
in
that,
and
that
then
led
into
the
creation
of
a
official
standards
effort
under
Emma
and
for
the
first
four
or
five
years
through
what's
called
Ekman
script.
Three
most
of
what
that
committee
did
was
was
simply
rubber
stamp
Brendon's
design.
A
A
Know
so
now
we
then
came
into
the
next
phase
of
it
of
your
book,
where
there's
the
failed
Reformation
when
we
started
to
see
the
difference
between
really
those
web
technologists
versus
the
more
traditional
Sigma
colleges.
Who
said
this
is
just
not
really
applicable,
you
know
really.
This
doesn't
make
any
sends
to
our
you
know,
to
a
judicial
technology
practices
essentially.
B
If
you
go
back
to
worse,
is
better
you
can
you
kind
of
say
well,
the
worst
is
better
people
launched
her
web
to
the
point
it
was
was
well
on
the
way
to
taking
over
the
world
and
the
better
is
better.
People
came
in
and
said
well,
this
is
this
is
kind
of
ugly.
This
isn't
so
good.
We
could
do
better
than
this.
Let's
in
many
cases,
let's
start
over
and
see
if
we
can
replace.
What's
there
was
something
better,
and
this
wasn't
just
happening
with
JavaScript.
B
It
was
at
the
same
time
XHTML
was
being
introduced
and
the
w3c
even
said
I
think
it
was
in
1998
that
HTML
was
going
to
be
put
into
maintenance
mode
and
that
hopefully
nobody
was
gonna,
create
any
new
EML
pages
anymore
and
stuff.
Well,
similar
thing
was
going
on
in
the
standards
group.
This
JavaScript,
they
say
not
work.
We're
gonna,
create
this
new
thing
from
script.
Four,
and
it's
going
to
be
a
serious
programming
language
and
we're
going
to
you
know,
do
all
the
technology.
B
A
B
This
was
a
big
one,
but
really
picked
this
long
list
of
features
and
we're
going
to
change
the
language.
So
it
embraces
all
these
other
things,
and
that
was
where
I
said
well.
Efforts
in
the
past
I've
seen
to
do
this
with
other
languages
tended
to
have
not
worked
out.
That's
why
I
personally
thought
it
was
worthwhile
trying
to
get
things
on
course,
of
one
more
where
you
build
upon
what
you
already
had
there
in
JavaScript
and
what
the
developer
community
was
doing
and
what
they
were
used
to
and
yes,
recognizing.
B
B
The
big
one
did
was
showed
that
there
was
an
alternative
to
this
complete
redo
effort
that
was
es4
showed
that
was
practical
to
do
something
that
was
incremental
building
upon
the
existing
standards
and
the
existing
language
system
used,
and
that
there
could
be
agreement
among
the
people
in
the
standards
group
and
among
the
people
who
build
browsers
on
how
to
move
JavaScript
forward
in
an
incremental
way.
Feature-Wise
there
was
a
few
new
things
in
yes-yes-yes.
B
3.1
eventually
was
named
es5,
but
so
there
was
a
few
incremental
things
like
the
addition
of
Jason
support
and
what
have
you
but
the
most
important
thing
about
it
was
saying:
here's
a
way
we
could
go
forward
here.
Here's
here's
a
way
we
could
work
together
on
the
foundation.
We
have
and
add
to
it.
Now.
A
B
So
JavaScript
now
is
completely
different.
When
I
first
got
involved,
there
was
literally
a
handful
of
people
who
were
involved
in
JavaScript
standards
and
over
the
course
of
development
of
Atma
script.
6
there
was
really
only
about
there
was
various
people
involved,
but
there's
really
only
about
10
people
involved.
It
continuously
through
the
effort
to
really
set
the
direction
now
because
of
the
success
of
that
and
the
success
of
JavaScript
that's
come
on
to
it.
It's
probably
over
a
hundred
people
who
are
officially
registered
as
participants
now
in
the
equus
crypt
standardization
process.
B
So
it
becomes
a
much
more
different,
different
thing
and
there's
lots
of
people
now,
each
with
their
own
idea
of
what
direction
to
go.
And
so
it's
it's.
It's
it's
a
it's
a
more
difficult
process
to
move
things
forward
because
of
that
popularity.
One
of
the
problems
with
programming
languages
is,
if
you
add
too
many
features,
even
if
they're
all
good
features
of
language
itself
becomes
too
complex,
so
I
think
the
balance
today
and
going
forward
is
one
of
cheesing.
What
are
the
really
important
things
to
add?
B
And
there
definitely
have
been
a
few
over
the
last
five
years
that
are
really
important
and
there
are
others
that
people
are
thinking
about,
but
there
are
so
many
good
ideas
and
you
can't
add
them
all
and
when
you're
dealing
with
a
large
group
of
contributors,
it's
hard
it's
hard
to
search
those
out,
because
people
don't
become
involved
with
a
language
effort
these
after
standardization
effort
to
not
do
stuff,
they
come
there
too.
Oh,
this
is
my
opportunity
to
to
add
my
favorite
feature
to
the
language.
A
Alan
I
want
to
thank
you
very
much
for
taking
the
time
to
talk
with
us
for
the
open
J's
world
keynote
interview,
Alan
worst
Brock,
who
was
project
editor
of
the
atmosphere,
specification
from
2008
to
2015,
and
the
author
of
the
book.
Sighs
journal,
ACM
history
of
programming
languages
conference,
so
we're
coming
up
with
a
25th
anniversary.
So
thank
you
so
much
for
joining
us.
Alan.