3 ms·
> Impressively small and trade-offs seem pretty reasonable. (namely lack of runtime parser, minimal built-ins). Not really. If you remove the runtime parser,
by bsder 4y ago
> Impressively small and trade-offs seem pretty reasonable. (namely lack of runtime parser, minimal built-ins).
Not really. If you remove the runtime parser, then you're effectively just a VM and there are lots of VMs significantly smaller than this.
Anytime you attempt to implement a language in a tiny amount of memory, a ridiculous chunk of it goes to implementing the parsing system. Infix parsing is particularly expensive to implement--which is why the only two languages in the extremely tiny space are Forth and Lisp.
- jpgvm 4y agoFair, I should have qualified my statement to "for JS". I don't think it's reasonable to compare to Forth/Lisp (or even Lua despite similar language capabilities) because of how pervasive JS is from a runtime perspective. Especially because this implements a sufficiently good subset that you can run isomorphic code on device, backend, browser.