3 ms·
I have to agree with this. The syntactic sugar that has been slowly amassing around JS has been mostly useless in the face of things like TypeScript and Babel r
by aphextron 8y ago
I have to agree with this. The syntactic sugar that has been slowly amassing around JS has been mostly useless in the face of things like TypeScript and Babel reaching ubiquitous usage. It's better off just left to a transpilation target at this point, as everything will be WASM based once that's ready anyways.
- paulddraper 8y agoSerious question: Why would you use WASM for a dynamically typed, GC'ed language?
- aphextron 8y ago>Serious question: Why would you use WASM for a dynamically typed, GC'ed language? The point is using it as universal bytecode for deploying anything you want. Ideally we could do front end web development with any language/framework combo and just compile to WASM. It seems like that's the future, with things like Blazor getting major support, and that JS will probably mostly die out over the next 5 years. https://github.com/aspnet/Blazor https://github.com/aspnet/Blazor
- bfrydl 8y agoWASM always seems like the future until you find out how big the binary is relative to even a meaty JS app when it includes all the code needed to support things like GC or dynamic typing.