Related
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
Is there any way for me to make values generated by a separate program available to JavaScript?
I'm fairly new to web design and JavaScript, so I'm not really sure if it is possible to do what I want at all. I know some of this is intentionally made difficult to do (prevented?) due to security issues. I don't need an actual written out solution so much as a confirmation that is or isn't possible, and maybe the appropriate API/function sets that would be used for it.
I want to have a web page which uses third party JavaScript API functions based on values being generated in a separate program on the device accessing the website, which is talking to external devices. I want this to be an ongoing process though; once the webpage is open it should continue to monitor the values and update the calls as appropriate.
Some sort of direct interaction would be preferable (is there a way to pass in a callback function or something?), but I haven't seen anything so far which looks like it could do that.
Is it possible to do something like write the values to an XML file on the program side and have a loop which repeatedly re-reads the file out on the webpage side? I don't know that this would be fast enough for what I want.
I'm not worried about compatibility with a large range of browsers or anything, so even a solution which uses something like a rarely supported HTML5 syntax would be fine as long as I can get one browser that it works on.
You can have your external application expose some sort of web interface on a server and then have the client side perform AJAX requests via Javascript to pull new data from the web interface.
This is actually a very, very good question. Some people may have skimmed it and to them it would look like lots of other newbie-misunderstands-the-web type questions. But this is actually different:
I want to have a web page which uses third party javascript API functions based on values
being generated in a seperate program on the device accessing the website, which is talking
to external devices
The bolded part is what makes this different.
Yes it's possible. It's how Flash and Java plugins can have access to your webcam and microphone. But it's not easy.
Firstly, this is not your usual server-based interaction (if it was, it would be much simpler and lots of web devs would be rightfully annoyed at yet another newbie asking such questions). You basically want your web app to have access to hardware on the user's machine.
I'm not worried about compatibility with a large range of browsers or anything
Good, that makes it a bit simpler. Because the web APIs don't handle this sort of thing at all. You need low level access to the browser.
You basically have 2 options:
If Flash or Java supports accessing the hardware you're trying to access then you can try writing an applet in either Flash or Java. Of the two, Java is slightly more friendly to programmers wanting to do low level, non-standard stuff. But flash is often more friendly to users (for some reason, Java applets to this day tend to be huge and take a long time to load).
If you can't do what you want in Flash or Java then you really only have one other option: write a browser plugin. For this there are two options (note: I've never done this before so I'm only going by what I've read). First is you can develop a plugin based on the old Netscape Plugin API. Google around to learn more about it. For IE on windows you have a second option of developing an ActiveX plugin. you can try to google around for that as well.
A bit of googling led me to Firebreath which is a cross-browser plugin framework that can compile to both NPAPI and ActiveX.
Oh, there is a third option. For Chrome and Firefox you can write javascript based plugins. Though like ActiveX on IE, the plugins won't be cross-browser compatible. I'm not even sure if the javascript plugin API can access really low level hardware.
What you're trying to do is interesting. Not many people have done it. But it's doable. Good luck.
I like Ivan's idea. Here's how I would do it:
In your external program, start up a web server that can accept WebSocket connections. Choose a very high port that isn't used standardly. For doing WebSockets, I like node.js and Socket.IO, but WebSocket libraries exist for Java, Python, Ruby, etc.
Then have your webpage open a WebSocket to your locally running web server which can very quickly stream data to your javascript app. See the examples on Socket.IO to see how very easy it could be. Every time your external program got a new piece of data, it could push it to your webpage, and a javascript callback would be fired with the new data.
UPDATE:
Since your other program is written in C++, this question and answers might be interesting: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/3916217/standalone-c-websocket-server-library.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm familiar with the term hacking. Although i never will become one of those hackers who scam people or make trouble, i believe it's an essential aspect any person who calls themselves a programmer must be able to do, as it is mainly about problem solving. But how does it work? When those people hack games or websites or the guy who hacked sony, do they use a programming langauge like ANSI C or c++ or assembly. Assuming they use a programming language, would it be possible to use javascript to hack in the same way you'd use any other language to hack. Furthermore, what do you have to do to be able to hack too. I just wanna know how it works, and the theory behind it all.
Hacking is unique every time. Exploiting some types of vulnerability doesn't require any particular language at all. Sometimes you hack whatever's there, in whatever language or form you find it. Sometimes it's necessary to automate part of the process, for example password cracking, for which you can use any language you like.
Cracking a commercial game commonly involves studying its disassembled machine code, figuring out which part does the CD or license check, and surgically replacing a few bytes of the code such that the check is skipped.
Hacking a website commonly involves discovery of some small clumsiness on the part of its developers, which allows viewing of should-be private data, or permits execution of custom code if it does not sanitize data properly. SQL injection is a common flaw when values sent to a database are not properly protected within quotes ("...") and so you can give values which break out of the quotes to execute your own commands. Cross-site scripting is a type of hack that uses JavaScript: If a website blindly takes parameters from the URL or submitted form data and displays them on the page without safely encoding them as text (worryingly common), you can provide a <script> tag for execution on that page. Causing someone to visit such a URL allows execution of scripted actions on their behalf. Code injection is also possible on the server side with PHP (or Perl, or similar), if sloppy code gives access to an eval-like function, or if server misconfiguration allows user-uploaded files to be interpreted by the server as scripts.
Hacking into an operating system or server program remotely may exploit bugs in its handling of network commands. Improper handling of malformed network commands can cause it to bungle user authentication checks or even to directly execute code provided in the network packet, such as via a buffer overflow.
Bugs in web browsers, plugins, and document viewers are similar. What should be safe types of file can be crafted with non-standard or broken values. If the programmer forgot to handle these cases safely they can often be used to escape the normal limits of the file type.
Viruses can also be slipped onto a machine via physical exchange of USB stick or CD or convincing someone to install virus-laden software. Such viruses are often written anew for each purpose (to avoid anti-virus software), but there are some common ones available.
Weak or badly implemented encryption can permit brute-force decoding of encrypted data or passwords. Non-existent encryption can permit wiretapping of data directly. A lack of encryption can also permit unauthenticated commands to be sent to a user or server.
Very obvious passwords, or unchanged default passwords, may allow simple guesswork to get into a system. Some people use the same password everywhere. This give websites the power to simply walk in to a user's email account and then take control of everything associated with it. It also means a password leak on one insecure website may be used to access accounts on many other websites.
And sometimes, "hacking" is social engineering. For example, imagine phoning up a junior employee and pretending to be someone in charge, to trick them into revealing internal information or reset a password. Phishing emails are a common, semi-automated form of social engineering.
Breaking into a system is rarely just one of these steps. It's often a long process of analyzing the system, identifying minor flaws and leveraging them to see if a useful attack vector is exposed, then branching out from that to gain more access.
I've never done it, of course.
There is a sort of "hacking" possible with javascript. You can run javascript from the adressbar. Try typing javascript: alert("hello"); in your address bar while on this website.
This way it it possible to hijack local variables, cookies for instance.
But since javascript runs on the client-side. People would have to use your workstation in order to gain access to your cookies. It is a technique that can be used to alter login data and pretend to be somebody else (if the site had been badly built).
If you really want to learn more about this there are some 'javascript hacking lessons' that can be found here: http://www.hackthissite.org/pages/index/index.php
Side note, there is a difference between hacking and cracking. Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_(programmer_subculture)
There are many exploits that can use javascript, probably the most well-known is going to be cross-site scripting (XSS).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cross-site_scripting
To follow up on Michael's answer, it is good to know the vulnerabilities in software and how people exploit those vulnerabilities in order to protect against them, however hacking is not something you want to be known for.
For a start, you are actually referring to what is known as Cracking, not hacking. This question will surely be closed, however some brief observations ^_^
Cracking comes from a base level understanding of how computer systems are built, hence you don't learn how to crack/hack, you learn about computer engineering in order to reverse-engineer.
A popular platform for hacking is Linux; over windows for example as its open source so experienced programmers can write their own programs. Although experienced hackers can accomplish their goal on any platform.
There are many levels of hacking however, simple website security is worlds apart from hacking in to Sony and facing jail ^_^
You may have some fun on http://www.hackthis.co.uk though
It depends on many things, for example: how the html code is structured, for example, I don't know if you could hack an iframe, but a normal web-page would be relative easy to hack. Another security pitfall programmers usually do is passing sensitive information via url query-string, then you could get those pieces of data and submitting them wherever they are used in the html code.
There could be another details, but I don't figure them out right now.
Often I need to refer to code written in HTML/JavaScript/CSS, but it is a very awkward construction to constantly refer to the descriptive trio of 'HTML/JavaScript/CSS' code.
for example, Mozilla refers to its HTML/JavaScript/CSS JetPack code as 'a JetPack'.
Other than the defunct 'dHTML', what are some concise, generic and accurate terms I can use to collectively refer to applications written in HTML/JavaScript/CSS.
I'm going to have to say DHTML anyway. Why would you say it's "defunct"? It is the perfect answer to this question. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DHTML. DHTML means Dynamic HTML—which is exactly what the combination of HTML/JavaScript/CSS code is.
Unless you're dealing with someone who isn't impressed with terms that are less than a year or two old, or unless you aren't specifically talking about code, DHTML conveys exactly what you are talking about.
Web application is perhaps too loose of a term, but it's a start.
Let's break it down.
HTML is data, CSS is presentation, and JavaScript is code. These are web technologies.
These are usually brought together by a browser.
Something in a browser on the web is a website.
JavaScript suggests it is somewhat interactive, so it's not just a site, it's an application.
("Application" also suggests that it's more complex, like with a SQL backend or something, so you might sound even more talented. :)
I'm guessing that you had the term LAMP (Linux, Apache, MySQL, and PHP) in mind? To my knowledge there is no such abbreviation for HTML, CSS, and JavaScript. The easiest way to say it is to just say it.
Versus "Front end" – I think that term implies that you built something that customers used. "Web application" is nonspecific about who the users are, so it would apply to customer-facing applications as well as internal-use applications. The word "application" implies that it's not just a tool; there are users who are not the programmers. "Front end" is probably more impressive because a customer-facing application has to be nicer than an internal one.
If you are not using it in a browser, or it's not actually on the web, maybe just your intranet or an internally distributed application bundle, it's still an application developed with web technologies.
Given that the person you're trying to convey this message to knows you're talking about web-related stuff - Front-end or Front-end development has always worked for me.
"HTML5" is the answer I now believe to be correct to replace "HTML/JavaScript/CSS". Since I asked the question in January, HTML5 has gained a lot more recognition for its incredible capabilities and promise. "HTML5" also has significantly greater name recognition than 7 months ago, and clearly sets it apart from lesser HTML.
I think the reason there's no specific term is the same reason that dHTML fell into disrepute - all three scripts are so integral to frontend development that there ceases to be a need to refer to them specifically. If you code in HTML, you almost necessarily use CSS, and if you have any active content at all it will most probably be in JavaScript.
Frontend development is a bit vague, but something like HTML based frontend development should get your point across.
If you want to refer to an application - use Web Application.
And if you need to refer to some code - use simple JS (JavaScript) because most of your code (except for some ie css expressions if you use it) will be in JS, isn't it?
Web Suite
suite: a set of things belonging together, in particular.
thus you have:
Web Suite: the set of HTML/CSS/JavaScript, the basic technologies used to develop a web site or application.
example:
"I used the Web Suite to make a cool website to show off all my pictures of cats sitting in boxes."
"UX" (User Experience) or "Front-end Development."
Web Applications, and Web 2.0 are both big names. One name/acronym that I personally like to use is RIA, or Rich Internet Application. From the article:
Rich Internet Applications (RIAs) are
web applications that have most of the
characteristics of desktop
applications, typically delivered
either by way of a standards based web
browser, via a browser plug-in, or
independently via sandboxes or virtual
machines.1 Examples of RIA
frameworks include Ajax, Curl, GWT,
Adobe Flash/Adobe Flex/AIR,
Java/JavaFX,[2] Mozilla's XUL,
OpenLaszlo and Microsoft
Silverlight.[3]
Also, someone else mentioned "impressing the suits," which this title tends to do. After all, it's got "rich" right in the name ;)
Web code
I was just having to write "HTML/Javascript/CSS" in an email and thought, "Isn't there a better term for this?". Googling, I found this post. I'm going with "web code".
Some call it a JAM stack, which stands for Javascript, API and Markup. But I acknowledge that it's not as specific as LAMP or something like that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solution_stack
https://jamstack.org/
However uncool it might be, it is still DHTML to me.
They are standard web technologies for producing dynamic websites and web applications. The last thing we need is another vacuous moniker for something that is more than adequately described by DHTML.
An Alternative to this Source or Page Source.
The Context all depends but for me this seemed to be a good name. When I right-click and I see "view page source" it seems relevant. it contains all of this HTML/CSS/JS.
I like Web Application but my use case was page-specific, not app-wide.
I've been calling this the web stack (HTML, CSS, JavaScript). Exclude frameworks or other tools, just the base technologies of what the web is made.
Many years back, I was told that Javascript was harmful, and I remember being annoyed with endless popup when I right-clicked an image to download it.
Now it seems suddenly that Javascript is great, and you can do a lot of things with it to let users have native-like web application experience.
I admit I have missed 6-7 years of Javascript literature, so I hope to start anew with SO kickstarting me to understand the following:
Is Javascript mainly concerned about user interface i.e. smoothen interaction between application and users and not about logic processing, number crunching or form processing etc.?
Can Javascript write to local hard drive (besides cookies)?
Can Javascript web application run with Javascript capabilities in browsers turned off? (I would think outright no, but an article on Adaptive Path said 'maybe')
Is AJAX illegal to use due to Eolas patent claim? Is it worth it spending effort learning it when the future is not secure? (I know AJAX is not Javascript)
Thanks. Hoping for enlightenment.
Yes. JavaSscript is usually used to enhance the user's experience and make the site easier to use. It is also possible to delegate validation tasks and the like to JavaScript, however (though this should never absolve the server of its responsibility to check input).
No.
That depends on how the application is written. If it's done properly, then the JavaScript will merely enhance the interface, and the application will still work without it; this is called progressive enhancement.
Not at all. AJAX is used extensively on this very site!
One reason for the resurgence of popularity for JavaScript lately is the emergence of several frameworks. These make the process of writing JavaScript much, much easier, allowing tasks that would previously have been horribly complex to be implemented with minimal time and effort. The most popular of these is jQuery, which is a good place to start if you're intending to get in on the action.
Overall, JavaScript is a very powerful tool that allows you to create very rich interfaces. Well worth learning.
Yes, Javascript is all about client side processing, but also about AJAX where it calls back to the server asynchronously so that users do not see pages reloading.
No
No, but there are ways to gracefully degrade the experience for non javascript users. It requires carefult planning however.
No, that lawsuit was just about the browser technology that enables it. As a developer you dont have to worry about that.
Can Javascript write to local hard drive (besides cookies)?
Not really. However, as HTML5 support becomes more widespread you'll be able to use things like Web Storage and Web SQL. You won't be able to write arbitrary files on the user's hard drive, but using those two technologies you'll be able to persistently store and access data.
Can Javascript web application run
with Javascript capabilities in
browsers turned off? (I would think
outright no, but an article on
Adaptive Path said 'maybe')
It really depends on how you define "web application." You can write web apps without using Javascript for anything but UI candy, in which case you can degrade gracefully without without it. However, it's also possible to write web apps that rely heavily (entirely, even) on Javascript, which will utterly fail without it.
Is AJAX illegal to use due to Eolas
patent claim? Is it worth it spending
effort learning it when the future is
not secure?
I'm not a lawyer, but I'd agree with the other answers -- you shouldn't worry about it. I'm certainly still writing AJAX stuff :)
Is Javascript mainly concerned about
user interface i.e. smoothen
interaction between application and
users and not about logic processing,
number crunching or form processing
etc.?
It's about both. And more than that.
Javascript has really come into its own in the past few years. Browsers have gotten a lot faster at executing it quickly, and people have been figuring out new ways to use the language itself to its full potential. You can really start using Javascript like a full-out application programming language, and not just to write little scripts that animate something or validate input.
If you're just getting back into the language and haven't read Crockford yet, I would highly recommend it. It's a great starting point to realizing the full potential of Javascript.
Edit: Some good Crockford Links
Javascript: The World's Most Misunderstood Programming Language
Javascript: The Good Parts (This is a presentation. Crockford also wrote a book by the same name that I haven't read myself, but I hear it's quite excellent.)
It's mainly for UI, but it can be used to save server-time on some operations (for example, Mathoverflow uses it to render LaTeX) and it's becoming popular to do so. But when you do this, you need to be respectful of the end-users time, because JavaScript can hold up some browsers, while it runs. But in general, it's a good and interesting idea.
Not without permission
If it's written correctly, it can. It's called "Graceful degredation" (some other variant terms exist, but the idea is the same). The basic idea is that you have it such that the JavaScript fails 'gracefully', and links that would normally get handled via JavaScript (i.e. to do some inline next-paging) will navigate to a 'backup' page that shows the relevant content.
I don't know about that, but AJAX can be implemented in different ways, XMLHTTPRequest is just one of them :) (And the most common, and suitable). Generally you like a library do this for you anyway (jQuery, or otherwise) but you can do it yourself for fun.
Yes, in my experience JavaScript is generally used to create a streamlined interface and relays information from the client to a server application for processing.
Yes, if the browser is configured to allow this (most aren't by default since this can be very dangerous).
No, JavaScript will not run if the browser is configured to have JavaScript disabled.
I wouldn't forgo learning JavaScript for this reason - as for the legality of the whole thing I wouldn't feel comfortable advising you about this. Still I think JavaScript is worth learning in spite of this situation.
The Eolas patent covers the embedding of objects in a HTML document (see US patent 5,838,906 titled "Distributed hypermedia method for automatically invoking external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document") ... this scope would not seem to include AJAX as a suite of technologies (being essentially scripting in a document to load content elements).
Partial answers:
I think all the security vulnerabilities associated with javascript have been fixed? IIRC the problems weren't with javascript, they were with particular browser's implementation of javascript.
I wouldn't worry about any patent claims on the AJAX technology. Patent sueing and counter-sueing is common place in the software world and invariably ends up with the affected parties licencing each other's technology. AJAX is not going anywhere :)
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
Does anyone see server-side JavaScript taking off? There are a couple of implementations out there, but it all seems to be a bit of a stretch (as in, "doing it BECAUSE WE CAN" type of attitude).
I'm curious to know if anyone actually writes JavaScript for the server-side and what their experiences with it have been to date.
Also, which implementation is generally seen as the most stable?
I like to read Googler Steve Yegge's blog, and recently I came across this article of his where he argues that Mozilla Rhino is a good solution for server-side JS. It's a somewhat sloppy transcript, you might prefer to watch the video of the talk. It also offers a little bit of insight on why he thinks server-side JS is a good idea in the first place (or rather, why he thinks that it's a good idea to use a dynamic language to script Java). I thought the points he makes were convincing, so you might want to check it out.
A while earlier, he also posted something about dynamic languages in general (he's a big fan of them), just in case you were wondering why to use JS at all.
Why would you want to process
something in Javascript when you can
process it in PHP or ASP.NET which are
designed specifically for this task?
Perhaps because JavaScript is a more powerful programming language than those two? For example, it has functions as first-class data types and support for closures.
Steve Yegge has blogged about porting Ruby on Rails to server-side JavaScript as an internal project within Google ("Rhino on Rails"). He did it because he likes Rails but using Ruby isn't allowed within Google.
Before it was acquired by Google, JotSpot used server-side JavaScript to let you query their database and display your pages. They used Rhino to do it. CouchDB uses server-side JavaScript to create views of their database.
As you can see from these examples, a great way to use JavaScript on the server is for plugins. One of the reasons it's used is that you can create a very isolated sandbox for people to run their code in. Also, because of the way that JavaScript as a language works, you can provide a user tooling specifically honed to the tasks your users need to complete. If you do this right, users don't need to learn a new language to complete their tasks, a quick glance at your API and examples is enough to get them on their way. Compare this to many of the other languages and you can see why using server-side JavaScript to provide a plugin architecture is so enticing.
A secondary popular solution, one which can be seen through a project like Jaxer, is that a common problem of web applications that do client-side validation is that, since JavaScript is easily bypassed in the browser, validation has to be run once again on the server. A system like Jaxer allows you to write some validation functionality that is reusable between both server and client.
Support for JS on the server has been getting stronger and the number of frameworks is getting bigger even faster.
Just recently the serversideJS group was founded. They have a lot of smart people that have been working on serverside JS for years (some of them more then 10).
The goal for this project is to create
a standard library that will
ultimately allow web developers to
choose among any number of web
frameworks and tools and run that code
on the platform that makes the most
sense for their application.
to the people who say "why would you choose JS over java or any other language?" - you should read this Re-Introduction by Crockford and forget about the DOM - the DOM is superugly, but that's not JS fault and JS is not the DOM.
I've never even heard of this, but it strikes me as using the wrong tool for the job. Since programming languages are just tools designed to help us solve some problem.
Why would you want to process something in Javascript when you can process it in PHP or ASP.NET which are designed specifically for this task?
Sure you can pound a nail in with a screw driver, but a hammer works much better because it was actually designed for it...
So no, I don't see it taking off.
Well, plain ol' ASP supported JavaScript server-side years ago and everyone onad their dog used VBShiate instead. But I have to agree with the others: JS does not seem to be the right tool here - and I love to do client-side JS :)
I personally did a whole site in server side JavaScript using ASP. I found it quite enjoyable because I was able to have some good code reuse. This included:
validation of parameters
object modeling
object transport
Coupled with a higher-level modeling tool and code gen, I had fun with that project.
I have no numbers on perf unfortunately, since it is used only on an intranet. However, I have to assume performance is on par with VBScript backed ASP sites.
It seems like most of you are put off by this idea because of how unpleasant the various client-side implementations of Javascript have been. I would check out existing solutions before passing judgment, though, because remember that no particular SS/JS solution is tied to the JS implementations currently being used in browsers. Javascript is based on ECMAScript, remember, a spec that is currently in a fairly mature state. I suspect that a SS/JS solution that supports more recent ECMA specs would be no more cumbersome than using other scripting languages for the task. Remember, Ruby wasn't written to be a "web language" originally, either.
Does anyone see Server-side Javascript
taking off?
Try looking at http://www.appjet.com a startup doing hosted JavaScript applications to get a feel for what you can do. I especially like the learning process which gently nudges the user to build things with a minimal overhead ~ http://appjet.com/learn-to-program/lessons/intro
Now it might seem a weird idea at the moment to use JavaScript but think back when PC's started coming out. Every nerd I knew of was typing away at their new Trash-80's, Commodore64's, Apple ]['s typing in games or simple apps in BASIC.
Where is todays basic for the younger hacker?
It is just possible that JavaScript could do for Web based server side apps as BASIC did for the PC.
XChat can run Javascript plugins.
I've some accounting software completely written in Javascript.
There's this interesting IO library for V8: http://tinyclouds.org/node/
CouchDB is a document database with 'queries' written in Javascript (TraceMonkey).
Considering this, i believe, server-side Javascript did take off.
Server-side programming has been around for a lot longer than client side, and has lots of good solutions already.
JavaScript has survived and become popular purely because developers have very little choice in the matter - it's the only language that can interact with a DOM. Its only competition on the client side is from things like Flash and Silverlight which have a very different model.
This is also why JavaScript has received so much effort to smart it up and add modern features. If it were possible for the whole browser market to drop JavaScript and replace it with something designed properly for the task, I'm sure they would. As it stands Javascript has strange prototype-based objects, a few neat functional programming features, limited and quirky collections and very few libraries.
For small scripts it's fine, but it's a horrible language for writing large complicated systems. That things like Firefox and Gmail are (partly) written in it is a heroic accomplishment on their part, not a sign that the language is ready for real application development.
Flash Media Server is scripted by using Server Side Action Script, which is really just javascript (ECMAScript). So, I do it a lot. In fact, most of my day was dealing with SSAS.
And I hate it. Though to be fair, a bunch of that is more related to the (not so great) codebase I inherited than the actual language.
I think server-side Javascript is guarenteed to take off. Its only a matter of time.
Mozilla, Google, and Adobe have so much vested interest for Javascript that it would take a miracle to dislodge it from the browser world. The next logical step is to move this into the server-side.
This is a step towards moving away from the hodge podge of Internet technology that usually includes all of these
HTML
CSS
Javascript
Serverside Language J2EE/ASP/Ruby/Python/PHP
SQL
I haven't heard much about the current state of Javascript Server frameworks, except that they are mostly incomplete.
I see server-side js will offer considerable advantages in future applications. Why? Web apps that can go offline, client-side db store, google gears, etc...
Following this trend, more and more logic are moving into the client-side. Use an ORM that works for client-side, and use another on server-side (be it PHP / Ruby / whatever), write your synchronization logic twice in two different languages, write your business logic twice in two different languages?
How about use js on the client AND the server side and write the code once?
Convincing?
Personaly i've been developing and using my own JavaScript framework for about 4 years
now.
The good thing about JS on serverside is that implemented in ASP Classic you don't need
any other plugin or software installed, besides i'm also using my javascript (client)
framework on my server, that allows me to enjoy of the same functionality and proven
performance of my functions at both environments client and serverside.
Not only for data validation, but also lets say HTML or CSS dynamic constructions
can be done client or serverside, at least with my framework.
So far it works fast, i have nothing to complain or regret except its great usability
and scalability that i have been enjoying during this past 4 years, until the point
that i'm changing my ASP Classic code to javascript code.
You can see it in pratice at http://www.laferia.com.do
Node.js has taken off and proven that server-side JavaScript is here to stay =)
I can't see most developers getting over their distaste for client-side JavaScript programming. I'd rather go to Java for server-side stuff before choosing JavaScript.