3 ms·
I know this might seem weird, but did you consider JavaScript? It takes backwards compatibility very seriously and with QuickJS (https://bellard.org/quickjs/ ht
by Zababa 5y ago
I know this might seem weird, but did you consider JavaScript? It takes backwards compatibility very seriously and with QuickJS (https://bellard.org/quickjs/ https://bellard.org/quickjs/) you could embed it easily if you wish to do so. I do understand that it could be a big culture shock to ask people using CMake to suddenly learn JavaScript and use it, and it has its fair share of warts.
- mathstuf 5y agoWe hadn't at the time because the only JS engines we could think of were 10x larger than CMake because they were built for browsers and had all kinds of cruft for a DOM that CMake doesn't care about hanging around. Maybe QuickJS would work, but (personally) I don't really think the language would be all that much of an improvement over what we have today (my issues are mostly around the oddities of which JS has quite a number of due to its roots). Then again, some of the ideas that have been tossed around for what could happen are probably interfering and I don't think JS would make those things any easier.
- Zababa 5y agoThat makes a lot of sense, I understand not wanting to deal with V8 or Spidermonkey and the JS-specific warts. Thanks.