3 ms·
It's hard to see how that would have worked. Google can put anything it wants in Chrome, but why would Safari or Firefox have done this? I don't see how they e
by jmull 3y ago
It's hard to see how that would have worked.
Google can put anything it wants in Chrome, but why would Safari or Firefox have done this? I don't see how they even could from a practical perspective, since they'd each either have to maintain a separate implementation (you really find out how good your specification is only once it needs to support multiple independent implementations) or import the Google one wholesale. Rinse and repeat every time Google changes Dart.
If Google puts it in Chrome and pushes it, most likely it simply dies there. But perhaps it catches on, furthering the reality that Chrome (and therefore Google) is the web. That's the worst case scenario for everyone (except Google, of course).
Anyway, WASM is here, and doesn't have these drawbacks, so we're all free to enjoy using Dart in the browser, if we want to (to the extent they support it). Not to mention Javascript is in quite a different place than it was when the idea of native Dart in the browser came up.
- no_wizard 3y agoI realize why it failed (everything you just iterated, plus WASM was around the corner in earnest) Simply as a thought exercise though, it would have been interesting to see a world where Dart did produce a specification and other browser vendors saw value in implementing and maintaining with it, is all. Its a great language with a lot of good features
- throwaway894345 3y agoWASM isn't the same as Dart in the browser because "Dart in the browser" means the Dart VM and standard library are already compiled and installed on your browser while WASM means the VM and standard library must be shipped from a server to your browser and compiled before the program can run.
- jmull 3y agoWell, you're trading one problem -- apps need to include their own dependencies -- with a more thorny problem: everyone has to somehow have already installed your app's dependencies. Of course, they don't, so you bundle your dependencies anyway, as polyfills or otherwise, and transpile, etc.
- fyzix 3y agoDart can compile to js so it would work similarly to how multiple image formats are handled. I think dart 1 was too basic to replace js.