3 ms·
If this were built on top of Node instead of JavaScriptCore, wouldn't a lot of the host integration come for free? Is there a benefit that building on JavaScrip
by natrius 11y ago
If this were built on top of Node instead of JavaScriptCore, wouldn't a lot of the host integration come for free? Is there a benefit that building on JavaScriptCore yields?
Of course, being a fun project to work on is benefit enough. Just trying to make sure I'm not missing something.
- sandij 11y agoPlanck’s main benefits compared to Node.js seem to be the fast startup time for small bash-like scripts, and the potential to be embedded in C-based apps: https://gist.github.com/mfikes/c7da1e7dfded26c7ceb9 https://gist.github.com/mfikes/c7da1e7dfded26c7ceb9
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- jballanc 11y agoAgreed. One interesting direction the project could go in is building as a framework to be embeddable into OS X apps. Cocoa already makes it trivial to expose Objective-C objects to JSC. This would just extend that to being able to script Cocoa apps in Clojure(Script).
- grayrest 11y agoThis is an extension of Ambly [0], which is basically the same thing but for iOS. I believe Ambly was developed because Clojurescript's startup time makes it more practical than clojure on a mobile device. David Nolen has posted benchmarks showing jsc runs clojurescript faster than v8 but I don't believe that was the primary motivation here. [0] https://github.com/omcljs/ambly https://github.com/omcljs/ambly