4 ms·
You can do that with almost any language. The analogy holds in that you can't get underneath JS in a browser but if you were to design a browser language with t
by cageface 15y ago
You can do that with almost any language. The analogy holds in that you can't get underneath JS in a browser but if you were to design a browser language with this kind of usage in mind it seems you'd want something that was a lot easier to optimize than JS. JS clearly was a language that was designed to be written directly.
- kenjackson 15y agoThe analogy holds in that you can't get underneath JS in a browser Yes. That's why JS is the target (and its ubiquity). but if you were to design a browser language with this kind of usage in mind it seems you'd want something that was a lot easier to optimize than JS JS isn't turning out to be too bad to optimize. Post-lower optimization already occurs in the browser. The part the compiler would do is optimization prior to emission to JS.
- erikreppen 15y agoKnowing the ins and outs of the DOM API implementations can get a bit arcane but optimizing JS is mostly about work avoidance and making sure you know how to make the native-code-implemented methods work for you to avoid putting extra work on the JIT/interpreters. You have to maintain a knowledge-base to be strong at it, but it can be very rewarding to see how much more you can get out of your code with a little bit of thought and study. The analogy also holds in that JS is extremely flexible and denies you very little. You can design and code to most any paradigm you want although I suspect attempting to implement static typing would get a little silly where numbers are concerned.
- erikpukinskis 15y agoYou can do that with almost any language What other language runs in all browsers?
- cageface 15y agoNone, I'm just saying that nothing in Javascript other than its ubiquity makes it particularly suitable for this.