Skip to main content

A first look at Dart

Posted by cayhorstmann on October 10, 2011 at 11:49 AM PDT

Google released details about the Dart language today, and I am surprised howmuch more it is like Java than like JavaScript. I had expected either a prototype-based language, a streamlined JavaScript (boring), or something like Newspeak (interesting). The latter seemed plausible because Gilad Bracha is on the Dart team. But it's very Java-like, with optional typing.

class BankAccount {
  var _balance; // _ before field name makes it private
  BankAccount(this._balance); // short form for boilerplate constructor
  deposit(amount) { _balance += amount; } // no param, return types
  withdraw(amount) { _balance -= amount; } // automatically public
  get balance() => _balance; // property getter

main() {
  BankAccount acct = new BankAccount(1000); // var acct = ... also ok
  print("balance: ${acct.balance}"); // string interpolation

Unlike Scala, it's not an expression-oriented language, but if a method merely returns the value of an expression, you can replace foo(args) { return expr; } with foo(args) => expr;

(Yes, that semicolon is required. This isn't JavaScript.)

Like in JavaScript, we have closures.

main() {
  var balance = 0;

  deposit(amount) { balance += amount; } // Updates variable from enclosing scope
  var withdraw = (amount) { balance -= amount; }; // Function literal


There are interfaces, just like in Java. Interfaces declare abstract methods, setters and getters, and factories.

interface Account factory BankAccount {
  Account(balance); // The factory class must supply such a constructor
  get balance();

class BankAccount implements Account {
  var _balance;
  BankAccount(this._balance); // Here it is
  get balance() => _balance;

main() {
  var acct = new Account(1000); // Constructs a BankAccount
  print("balance: ${acct.balance}");

There are generics, but the type parameters aren't taken very seriously.

main() {
  List<String> names = new List<String>();
  List<Object> objects = names; // This would not work in Java or Scala
  print(names[1]); // Now names has something that's not a string
  print(names[1].length()); // A runtime error

Technically, all type parameters are covariant. Scala programmers would wince—they except the static type system to catch errors such as this one. Of course, there is a price to pay—variance annotations,  wildcards, type bounds.

There is a tiny library, but you can't get at the library source from the documentation. This isn't Scala or Ruby. Get the source from here.

Who needs that clunker? The stated goal was to have an alternative to JavaScript, with a more perfomant VM. Apparently, there are currently roadblocks in efficiently compiling JavaScript. (Dart can also be compiled into JavaScript, but that seems more of an interim solution, until that happy time when every browser has a Dart VM.)

Will web programmers give up years of experience with JavaScript for another language, just because it compiles better or scales to larger projects? Probably not anytime soon, and Google knows that. These people think that Dart will be the new vehicle for GWT. I suppose GWT is important, but is it that important?

That's where the poison dart conspiracy comes in. Where could a shiny new language and VM be required? There is that other Google toolkit that doesn't run on the web but on devices that are connected to the web. Right now we program them in Java—familiar old Java, but with a different UI toolkit and a different VM. That may not always be the case.

When I first heard this, I wasn't so sure, but now that I had a glimpse at the language, I agree that Dart would make a perfectly good language for Android. Maybe it will be used for web and mobile programming. Google would like that. For us Java developers, it would not be such a happy development—another nail in the coffin of mobile Java.

Related Topics >>


jdart is now available ( ...

jdart is now available ( which brings Dart to the JVM via invokedynamic.

Having looked at the syntax and knowing both Java and C#, ...

Having looked at the syntax and knowing both Java and C#, Dart appears to be borrowing considerably more from C# than from Java. Implicit typing with var (although Dart has double duties with var for untyped declarations), lambda syntax (=>) for expressions, covariant generic type parameters (opt-in feature added in c# 3 - it's now at C# 5.) I see Java with the pascal casing and "implements" keyword. I think this will attract many Java programmers who are tired of the relative stagnancy of the language but are unwilling to cross to the dark side of .NET.

Newspeak isn't prototype-based at all! &quot;I had ...

Newspeak isn't prototype-based at all!

"I had expected a prototype-based language, either a streamlined JavaScript (boring) or something like Newspeak (interesting)."

With this sentence, you seem to imply that Newspeak is prototype-based. On the contrary, classes permeate the design of Newspeak to the extreme, even more than any mainstream language. Classes are first-class objects (sorry for the wording clash) and are nestable, in the true sense that any instance can have their own classes, to any depth. They subsume modules and namespaces, allow library inheritance, side-by-side deployment, etc.

Sorry about the mangled logic. I edited the post to ...

Sorry about the mangled logic. I edited the post to straighten that out.

Frankly, I&nbsp;love the DART language syntax. I hope they ...

Frankly, I love the DART language syntax. I hope they roll it out as an alternative to Java-proper that runs on the JVM. I'd seriously consider using it.

That being said, I'm more interested in desktop development than web, so all this web integration doesn't really interest me at all.

The way things are going with the lawsuits, Google isn't ...

The way things are going with the lawsuits, Google isn't likely to embrace the JVM anytime soon. But I agree that Dart would make a nice alternative to Java, particularly for teaching. I take "main()" over "public static void main(String[] args)" any time :-)