Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submitlogin

Sure, that would be an interesting conversation to have. But that's not what anyone's doing. Complaining that asm.js piggybacks off JavaScript instead of being a bytecode for which no interpreters currently exist — which is what you and fijal seem to be doing — is not "talking about what would be the best way to do that."

In case you've forgotten, your suggestion in the other thread was literally just "a standardized VM in the browser." When I tried to get you to elaborate on what that meant in practical terms, you couldn't explain how it would be any different from what we have with asm.js except that you want a bytecode syntax for the input instead of the syntax asm.js uses.

If you want to talk about practical ways we might move beyond JavaScript someday, feel free. I think that's an interesting topic. That's why I think it's unfortunate that so far, people just seem to be complaining that asm.js doesn't involve bytecode.

Personally, I think asm.js is an important step in the direction of a post-JavaScript world. It moves us away from dependence on JavaScript by helping to better enable alternative languages in the browser.




I'm not complaining about asm.js, it's more that I feel like the hole we (and I don't mean I personally) are digging is getting deeper and deeper and switching is only getting less and less likely.

When you say that I could not explain how would it be different, maybe I just did not notice your response which is why I did not respond (and the last response is where you asked how is having JS as bytecode that different from any other bytecode).

How would it be different? I mean it's not that I insist on the bytecode for the sake of having bytecode (I kind of hint at that several times in the last thread, but I guess I could have been more explicit). It's more that I feel that some sort of fundamental change in the way that web applications are built is necessary. Why? I don't think that JS & DOM scripting can be pushed that much further, like I'm having a hard time imagining that say 5-10 years down the line JS applications will be able to compete with native, somewhat computationally heavy applications (which is what I assumed was the direction in which this whole web thing was going). Today, when I open some site which is written as a SPA (e.g. HootSuite) in Chrome, within a couple of minutes, the CPU goes to 100% (on i7). And that is an application that is not really doing anything that computationally expensive. And it's not just HootSuite.

So yeah, I don't really care that much about bytecode, and I realize that some change would not happen overnight. Do I have concrete steps how to achieve this? Can't say that I do.

-----


> I don't think that JS & DOM scripting can be pushed that much further, like I'm having a hard time imagining that say 5-10 years down the line JS applications will be able to compete with native, somewhat computationally heavy applications (which is what I assumed was the direction in which this whole web thing was going).

You're still not getting it. Native (i.e. compiled from C/C++) computationally-heavy applications is exactly what asm.js allows!

The fact that it's a subset of JS is a clever hack that gets over the backwards-compatibility problems, but don't let that fool you -- asm.js really is a low-level compilation target.

-----


What exactly is there not to get? It's more that I'm not sure I believe the claims and that it seems like putting lipstick on a pig.

-----


If you don't believe our claims, please check out the source and try for yourself :)

-----




Applications are open for YC Summer 2015

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Y Combinator | Apply | Contact

Search: