Anders Hejlsberg

The same engine is there, but you got to build it in a manner where it can be very interactive.

And that was not typically...

And new language features that get developed in ECMAScript, we implement once they reach stage three or four in the standardization committee.

And then we've sort of been on that train ever since the beginning.

So there is a pipeline that supplies new language features in a standardized manner.

We sort of see it as our purview to define the type system on top.

So that is, if you will, our playground.

Now, I still have things that I wish I could have in the language itself.

I mean, I like functional programming.

I like functional programming languages.

And key to them is that everything is an expression.

There's really no distinction between statements and expressions.

And so...

One of the features that JavaScript lacks in my estimate is the ability to give symbolic names to temporary results and expressions and then reuse them.

This is the let blah equals whatever in some expression that functional programming languages, you know, like Camel and whatever all have.

And it's nice because you could just stay in an expression context and you can just dot things together and, and, or whatever, and sort of do this more fluent style of programming.

But then all of a sudden you need a name for something you want to reuse.

And now you've got to pop out and declare variable or turn it into state anyway.

You know, that's one thing that I would like to fix.

There's, there's something called do expressions that may or may not happen at some point, but it's taken a long time.