2 ms·
That isn't surprising because the backend is simple and the frontend is not. By that, I mean that you get to choose your entire playing field on the backend. W
by untog 8y ago
That isn't surprising because the backend is simple and the frontend is not.
By that, I mean that you get to choose your entire playing field on the backend. What language are you going to use? What database? What OS will it run on? What (reliable) network connection? All can be tailored to your heart's desire.
No such luck on the frontend. Your code is going to run on a diverse set of clients, which you have no control over. The connection quality might be awful. The CPU on the device might be awful, or it might have low memory.
As much as people like to crap on JavaScript, it isn't the reason the front-end is difficult to program for. And WebAssembly isn't going to solve all of these issues either.
- devxpy 8y agoThese technical problems you present, are difficult but solvable if a big player is willing to pitch in. I don't like to target specific words, but the problems you specify apply to JS as much as they do to any other language. A C/rust like language has far better CPU/memory efficiency than JS. A batteries included language like python might even be better at network latency since it doesn't have to bundle in the code that should've been in a stdlib, not client code. We use different languages because they are good at different things. The browser doesn't seem to respect this Philosophy :(