3 ms·
<script type="application/lua">
by mitchtbaum 11y ago
<script type="application/lua">
- alextgordon 11y agoPlease not, Lua would be easy to implement but if we can only pick one language then it's too similar to JS. We need more diversity, static types+AOT+noGC would be a good start. Also if we do get Swift it will be for the same reason we got <canvas>. Apple wanted to make dashboard, so they put an extension in webkit, people started using it on the open web and...
- frik 11y agoLua would certainly be a good choice. A really good language syntax, the language is small, and LuaJIT2 is very very fast. Though, it's better to stay with one language, JavaScript - it's a good language, and everyone should learn it first (I would argue most simply to don't understand Javascript and use only a fraction of it, in an non-optimal way). Fragmentation is bad for the web. I would already consider CoffeeScript/TypeScript/Dart/etc that compile to JS bad because its fragmenting the developer base and it makes it harder to reuse code. Have you ever visited a GitHub page only to find out that a lovely open source project is coded in some obscure language that compiles to Javascript.
- Fizzadar 11y agoI've been waiting for browsers to implement this for years, would love the opportunity to drop JS for Lua!