6 ms·

I agree completely, but I would take it a step further: If wasm doesn't overtake JS, something else that offers native bindings to other languages will eventua

I agree completely, but I would take it a step further: If wasm doesn't overtake JS, something else that offers native bindings to other languages will eventually. There are huge benefits to be had for teams that want to be able to code their full stack in a language that isn't JS. We never asked for JavaScript (well the vast majority of us), but we've been stuck with it for the past two decades for all things web. Now that a doorway to replacing it with a general-purpose solution has been cracked, I expect the industry to kick it wide open as soon as possible. Not because JS is bad per se (it has certainly gotten much better), but because a lot of developers would simply prefer to use something else.

shadowmint 10y ago
> something else that offers native bindings to other languages will eventually... No it won't. This is our one chance to kill javascript; if we don't do it now, it'll be entrenched forever, and best we'll ever get is 'compiles-to-js' languages like clojurescript and typescript. Let's be realistic; who has the man power, community good will and business savvy to push an entirely new language across all platforms, mobile and desktop? Microsoft? Come on. Apple? Google? Google tried with dart and failed. Who else, seriously, is going to step up? We can day dream about the magical 'no js' world, but it's never going to happen if web assembly doesn't work. Currently we're seeing the reverse, js stretched off the browser, onto the server, into mobiles, onto iot devices. You've got to layout some pretty damn fine arguments about why that trend is going to suddenly reverse. Web assembly is pretty much our last best chance to flip javascript off and have something better...but it might already be too late for that to work. :/
- ncantelmo 10y ago
  I don't quite agree with the all-or-nothing assessment, but your passion is exactly why this will happen. Too many of the silent developer masses (probably mostly back-end engineers) have and continue to feel this way about being stuck with JS. The genie's out of the bottle, it's not going back in.
- wybiral 10y ago
  > This is our one chance to kill javascript; if we don't do it now, it'll be entrenched forever, and best we'll ever get is 'compiles-to-js' languages like clojurescript and typescript. Do people really hate JavaScript that much? I've grown fond of it in recent years, especially after ES6.
  - bluejekyll 10y ago
    Yes. People really hate JavaScript that much. ES6 brought some sanity to the language, but I continue to be firmly in the camp of continuing to hate and despise its existence.
    - wybiral 10y ago
      Weird. I remember hating it ages ago. So much so that I was developing a Python->JavaScript transpiler (before all the cool kids were writing transpilers!) and blogging about how bad it was [1]. Granted, that was back in 2008 and most of my complaints have been addressed now almost a decade later (except for destructors, it still doesn't have those, but I also don't need them anymore). These days I move between JavaScript, Python, Go, and C seamlessly and I can honestly say that I don't hate any of them as much as clients, managers, and 3rd party code. [1] http://davywybiral.blogspot.com/2008/01/javascript-bad.html http://davywybiral.blogspot.com/2008/01/javascript-bad.html
      - bluejekyll 10y ago
        People have definitely had and continue to have successful careers in, and many actually enjoy, JS. I would never debate that. I think language choice for many people is a personal decision. There are some that I will hold my nose and use; not even complain too much. There are others that the minute there is an alternative to, I would use that instead. JS is in the latter camp for me. If it helps, my current favorite language is Rust... they may be syntactically similar, but I just can't stand the semantics, or lack there of, of JS.
    - irrational 10y ago
      This could be said for any language. Yes. People really hate C that much. C++ brought some sanity to the language, but I continue to be firmly in the camp of continuing to hate and despise its existence.
- jfoutz 10y ago
  Wild guess? Oracle with Java.
  - shadowmint 10y ago
    :troll: well played.
    - jfoutz 10y ago
      Not the intention, but I see that interpretation. It's not hard to imagine oracle making a netbeans plugin for free and an expensive enterprise version that's faster. Selling point is leveraging existing back end skills.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - rogersach 10y ago
    Java already compiles to JS via Kotlin.
    - jfoutz 10y ago
      And gwt
  - bluejekyll 10y ago
    Java failed to be what JavaScript became for a number of reasons, but I think the primary was the fact that it never integrated with HTML as cleanly as JS. It could have been JS, but it was strangled to death by Sun (on the client).
    - mort96 10y ago
      Java also has the problem of long startup times while the JIT is doing its thing. Javascript has always just started executing right away. Waiting a minute or two for a Java loading bar wasn't fun.
- kartickv 10y ago
  Is TypeScript as annoying a language to code in as Javascript? Or is it comparable to other modern languages like Swift and Go? If it is, I'd say that pain of dealing with Javascript (for developer productivity and happiness) is already taken care of.
  - bluejekyll 10y ago
    But webassembly will allow for typescript or you language of choice, c/c++ and rust first, and as the OP suggests others too.
    - kartickv 10y ago
      The question was whether the concern of JS being frustrating is already solved by TypeScript, in which case WebAssembly is less important than it would be otherwise. (Which isn't to say that there aren't other questions like efficiency and already-existing codebases written in other languages.)
  - Clubber 10y ago
    Typescript is a type safe language that "compiles" into javascript. The Microsoft implementation compiles on save, so you work in your file.ts and a program running somewhere fires when the file is saved and converts it to file.js which you would distribute. I haven't used it yet, but the demo from Anders looked good. It's an attempt to fix the "loosey goosey" nature of javascript. I would be great if browsers supported it as a built in language. https://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Anders-Hejlsberg-Introducing-TypeScript https://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Anders-Hejlsberg-Introducing... If you watch the video, you'll notice the argument notation is name: type rather than type name. I think Anders is reminiscing about his Delphi days.
    - TAForObvReasons 10y ago
      > If you watch the video, you'll notice the argument notation is name: type rather than type name. I think Anders is reminiscing about his Delphi days. ActionScript and the proposed ECMAScript 4 also use the name:type notation, so there is definitely some prior art in the web sphere
- Bombthecat 10y ago
  Jup, I think pretty much the same. JavaScript is freaking everywhere. Your DMS? Chances are it understands JavaScript. Your scanning software? Understands JavaScript. Your security gateway? JavaScript. You API management software? Also JavaScript. And a ton more. JavaScript is here to stay.
ZenPsycho 10y ago
no, WASM will not replace JS unless somehow, overnight, the idea of downloading 30mb of compiled runtime libraries to read an inaccessible-to-screenreaders news article becomes appealing. but i wouldn't hold my breath for 1990's style java applet loading throbbers to come back into fashion. there's a reason that stuff got outcompeted by the supposedly "inferior" javascript. what wasm competes with is flash games, insecure java applets, and npapi and nativeclient in general.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  It got outcompeted by Flash, JavaScript had zero to do with it. Had Apple not forbidden Flash on iOS, there would be no JavaScript superiority to talk about.
  - ZenPsycho 10y ago
    I invite you to try your favourite flash website in Puffin browser to see how "great" an experience flash on an iphone is.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      Surely not worse than what JavaScript is. Thankfully on Android and WP devices I was able to take the battery out, when the web site developer got too creative for the device's CPU/GPU.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- themihai 10y ago
  Well, 5G is not that far. Remember when SPA was considered too "fat"? Now most of the web apps are SPA with few MBs to download.
  - ZenPsycho 10y ago
    SPAs are still considered too fat. how do you miss the nearly daily "web bloat crisis" stories on HN?
bostik 10y ago
> If wasm doesn't overtake JS, something else that offers native bindings to other languages will eventually When I read this I realised that WASM might just pave the way for something more fundamental: browser runtime stdlib. One of the big issues, even highlighted in this very thread, is that people are wary of forcing 10MB+ blob downloads on their users. What would the effect be if browser provided a proper stdlib?
- marcosdumay 10y ago
  What was the last time you wrote something that was 10MB after compiled to native code when optimizing for space? Linux + BusyBox is less than 2MB (I've fitted it in floppies not too long ago) if you don't include the drivers for everything. I've created a 10MB binary set that implements an entire email server, with everything statically linked, and in Haskell (that leads to inherently big binaries).
  - attractivechaos 10y ago
    Yes, I still remember the days when we could have core Linux experience on one 1.44MB floppy disk. This keeps reminding me how bloated most modern software are.

shadowmint 10y ago

> something else that offers native bindings to other languages will eventually... No it won't. This is our one chance to kill javascript; if we don't do it now, it'll be entrenched forever, and best we'll ever get is 'compiles-to-js' languages like clojurescript and typescript. Let's be realistic; who has the man power, community good will and business savvy to push an entirely new language across all platforms, mobile and desktop? Microsoft? Come on. Apple? Google? Google tried with dart and failed. Who else, seriously, is going to step up? We can day dream about the magical 'no js' world, but it's never going to happen if web assembly doesn't work. Currently we're seeing the reverse, js stretched off the browser, onto the server, into mobiles, onto iot devices. You've got to layout some pretty damn fine arguments about why that trend is going to suddenly reverse. Web assembly is pretty much our last best chance to flip javascript off and have something better...but it might already be too late for that to work. :/

ncantelmo 10y ago
I don't quite agree with the all-or-nothing assessment, but your passion is exactly why this will happen. Too many of the silent developer masses (probably mostly back-end engineers) have and continue to feel this way about being stuck with JS. The genie's out of the bottle, it's not going back in.
wybiral 10y ago
> This is our one chance to kill javascript; if we don't do it now, it'll be entrenched forever, and best we'll ever get is 'compiles-to-js' languages like clojurescript and typescript. Do people really hate JavaScript that much? I've grown fond of it in recent years, especially after ES6.
- bluejekyll 10y ago
  Yes. People really hate JavaScript that much. ES6 brought some sanity to the language, but I continue to be firmly in the camp of continuing to hate and despise its existence.
  - wybiral 10y ago
    Weird. I remember hating it ages ago. So much so that I was developing a Python->JavaScript transpiler (before all the cool kids were writing transpilers!) and blogging about how bad it was [1]. Granted, that was back in 2008 and most of my complaints have been addressed now almost a decade later (except for destructors, it still doesn't have those, but I also don't need them anymore). These days I move between JavaScript, Python, Go, and C seamlessly and I can honestly say that I don't hate any of them as much as clients, managers, and 3rd party code. [1] http://davywybiral.blogspot.com/2008/01/javascript-bad.html http://davywybiral.blogspot.com/2008/01/javascript-bad.html
    - bluejekyll 10y ago
      People have definitely had and continue to have successful careers in, and many actually enjoy, JS. I would never debate that. I think language choice for many people is a personal decision. There are some that I will hold my nose and use; not even complain too much. There are others that the minute there is an alternative to, I would use that instead. JS is in the latter camp for me. If it helps, my current favorite language is Rust... they may be syntactically similar, but I just can't stand the semantics, or lack there of, of JS.
  - irrational 10y ago
    This could be said for any language. Yes. People really hate C that much. C++ brought some sanity to the language, but I continue to be firmly in the camp of continuing to hate and despise its existence.
jfoutz 10y ago
Wild guess? Oracle with Java.
- shadowmint 10y ago
  :troll: well played.
  - jfoutz 10y ago
    Not the intention, but I see that interpretation. It's not hard to imagine oracle making a netbeans plugin for free and an expensive enterprise version that's faster. Selling point is leveraging existing back end skills.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- rogersach 10y ago
  Java already compiles to JS via Kotlin.
  - jfoutz 10y ago
    And gwt
- bluejekyll 10y ago
  Java failed to be what JavaScript became for a number of reasons, but I think the primary was the fact that it never integrated with HTML as cleanly as JS. It could have been JS, but it was strangled to death by Sun (on the client).
  - mort96 10y ago
    Java also has the problem of long startup times while the JIT is doing its thing. Javascript has always just started executing right away. Waiting a minute or two for a Java loading bar wasn't fun.
kartickv 10y ago
Is TypeScript as annoying a language to code in as Javascript? Or is it comparable to other modern languages like Swift and Go? If it is, I'd say that pain of dealing with Javascript (for developer productivity and happiness) is already taken care of.
- bluejekyll 10y ago
  But webassembly will allow for typescript or you language of choice, c/c++ and rust first, and as the OP suggests others too.
  - kartickv 10y ago
    The question was whether the concern of JS being frustrating is already solved by TypeScript, in which case WebAssembly is less important than it would be otherwise. (Which isn't to say that there aren't other questions like efficiency and already-existing codebases written in other languages.)
- Clubber 10y ago
  Typescript is a type safe language that "compiles" into javascript. The Microsoft implementation compiles on save, so you work in your file.ts and a program running somewhere fires when the file is saved and converts it to file.js which you would distribute. I haven't used it yet, but the demo from Anders looked good. It's an attempt to fix the "loosey goosey" nature of javascript. I would be great if browsers supported it as a built in language. https://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Anders-Hejlsberg-Introducing-TypeScript https://channel9.msdn.com/posts/Anders-Hejlsberg-Introducing... If you watch the video, you'll notice the argument notation is name: type rather than type name. I think Anders is reminiscing about his Delphi days.
  - TAForObvReasons 10y ago
    > If you watch the video, you'll notice the argument notation is name: type rather than type name. I think Anders is reminiscing about his Delphi days. ActionScript and the proposed ECMAScript 4 also use the name:type notation, so there is definitely some prior art in the web sphere
Bombthecat 10y ago
Jup, I think pretty much the same. JavaScript is freaking everywhere. Your DMS? Chances are it understands JavaScript. Your scanning software? Understands JavaScript. Your security gateway? JavaScript. You API management software? Also JavaScript. And a ton more. JavaScript is here to stay.

ZenPsycho 10y ago

no, WASM will not replace JS unless somehow, overnight, the idea of downloading 30mb of compiled runtime libraries to read an inaccessible-to-screenreaders news article becomes appealing. but i wouldn't hold my breath for 1990's style java applet loading throbbers to come back into fashion. there's a reason that stuff got outcompeted by the supposedly "inferior" javascript. what wasm competes with is flash games, insecure java applets, and npapi and nativeclient in general.

pjmlp 10y ago
It got outcompeted by Flash, JavaScript had zero to do with it. Had Apple not forbidden Flash on iOS, there would be no JavaScript superiority to talk about.
- ZenPsycho 10y ago
  I invite you to try your favourite flash website in Puffin browser to see how "great" an experience flash on an iphone is.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    Surely not worse than what JavaScript is. Thankfully on Android and WP devices I was able to take the battery out, when the web site developer got too creative for the device's CPU/GPU.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
themihai 10y ago
Well, 5G is not that far. Remember when SPA was considered too "fat"? Now most of the web apps are SPA with few MBs to download.
- ZenPsycho 10y ago
  SPAs are still considered too fat. how do you miss the nearly daily "web bloat crisis" stories on HN?

bostik 10y ago

> If wasm doesn't overtake JS, something else that offers native bindings to other languages will eventually When I read this I realised that WASM might just pave the way for something more fundamental: browser runtime stdlib. One of the big issues, even highlighted in this very thread, is that people are wary of forcing 10MB+ blob downloads on their users. What would the effect be if browser provided a proper stdlib?

marcosdumay 10y ago
What was the last time you wrote something that was 10MB after compiled to native code when optimizing for space? Linux + BusyBox is less than 2MB (I've fitted it in floppies not too long ago) if you don't include the drivers for everything. I've created a 10MB binary set that implements an entire email server, with everything statically linked, and in Haskell (that leads to inherently big binaries).
- attractivechaos 10y ago
  Yes, I still remember the days when we could have core Linux experience on one 1.44MB floppy disk. This keeps reminding me how bloated most modern software are.