3 ms·
Why a JavaScript engine for an IoT platform?
- Matthias247 11y agoI'm adding the most expected question here: How does it compare to duktape? Feature, Performance and Requirement wise?
- ithkuil 11y agoHi, sorry we didn't have time to make a thorough comparison. Our focus is very tiny embedded platforms and we tuned our tradeoffs for that target from the start, while duktape looks to be going in that direction. When you initialise V7 on an embedded platform the runtime consumes only 873 bytes. V7 can interpret code on the device or run precompiled bytecode straight off flash memory, including all the referenced strings. At the moment duktape offers more features that we postponed for later, such as ES6 Proxy or TypedArray, but on the other hand V7 focuses more on dealing with heap fragmentation by implementing a compacting GC for strings and other memory footprint goodies. We successfully run it on the esp8266 device. Performance is what we sacrificed in order to focus on footprint. However it's acceptable for scripting needs. Don't expect to compute SHA2 in pure JS while streaming your data full wire-speed :-( Requirement wise, V7 is completely self-contained and requires only malloc or an equivalent shim. stdio requirement is optional and can be compiled out easily. The C API plays well with both null terminated strings and non-null terminated strings, making it easier to integrate V7 with other languages or with embedded scenarios where copying too much data around is just not an option.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- brudgers 11y agoIf you're interested in feedback, V7 might make a good "Show HN". Guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html https://news.ycombinator.com/showhn.html