3 ms·
Without being too reductive, a JS implementation of anything represents new possibilities (running in the web browser or other environments), whereas a rust por
by TAForObvReasons 8y ago
Without being too reductive, a JS implementation of anything represents new possibilities (running in the web browser or other environments), whereas a rust port doesn't expand the surface area. To give a comparison, critiques of rust ports are similar to the critiques of porting everything to node.js a few years ago -- most of the benefit comes from rewriting and applying lessons learned from the existing implementations.
- goatlover 8y agoBut Rust programs can run anywhere JS can now with web assembly, while the reverse isn't true. JS can only run where there is VM for it.
- erikpukinskis 8y agoAre you referring to embedded applications? An app tends to either be embedded or not. Obviously if you’re embedded you’re not going to use a JavaScript implementation of git. You’re just not going to run Rust on IE8. And you’re not going to run JavaScript on your digital thermometer. Either way, there’s no confusion about which language runtime, Rust or JavaScript, has a bigger installed base on those respective devices.