3 ms·
We're at peak JS and WASM hasn't managed to get their JS integration done to any acceptable degree. Where do we go from here? Simply avoiding the web isn't viab
by ScottFree 6y ago
We're at peak JS and WASM hasn't managed to get their JS integration done to any acceptable degree. Where do we go from here? Simply avoiding the web isn't viable at this stage.
- simplecto 6y agoLook at intercoolerjs[1] (or the successor to it, HTMX[2]), turbolinks[3]. They make front-end development nearly non-existent and effortless. Just include in your source and start using HTML attributes. [1] - https://intercoolerjs.org https://intercoolerjs.org [2] - https://htmx.org/ https://htmx.org/ [3] - https://github.com/turbolinks/turbolinks https://github.com/turbolinks/turbolinks
- satya71 6y agoHTMX looks pretty cool. Thanks for the tip. I've been enjoying AlpineJS[1] [1] https://github.com/alpinejs/alpine/ https://github.com/alpinejs/alpine/
- RedShift1 6y agoWe used to have more options. There was Flash and Java. Flash is insecure, Java too (it's basically running code that can do anything a native executable can do). Java also has the competing JVM problems, backwards compat,... But instead of getting our hands dirty and fixing the issues, the powers that be decided to throw away all the hard work from the past and move to WASM which is incomplete, barely supported and will have the same security issues Flash and Java had once it gets more broader adoption. And so the circle continues.
- lokedhs 6y agoJava had sandboxing from the beginning. There were some bugs that allowed client code to escape the sandbox, but it wasn't nearly as bad as some people made it out to be. I'd dare to guess that Javascript has had more sandbox-escaping bugs than Java has had.