3 ms·
Yes, although the sizes of the binaries differ greatly. See this [1] Twitter reply. A "hello world" example produced an ~85mb binary in Node and Deno, whereas Q
by toastercat 3y ago
Yes, although the sizes of the binaries differ greatly. See this [1] Twitter reply. A "hello world" example produced an ~85mb binary in Node and Deno, whereas QuickJS produced a 6MB binary.
[1] https://nitter.net/kebsworld/status/1648488613351657474#m https://nitter.net/kebsworld/status/1648488613351657474#m
- SahAssar 3y agoThe standard library or use-cases are not even comparable though, right? If I wanted to make a HTTPS request in quickjs I'd probably need to pull in openssl, write a http parser, etc, etc. I might be wrong, but comparing quickjs to node/deno seems like comparing a aquarium pump to an electric car. They both contain engines that are driven by electricity, but the similarities stop there. They are both good at what they do, but I would never replace one with the other.
- toastercat 3y agoNo, you are right. Deno and Node include the V8 engine which was built by a team at Google for the Chromium browser. QuickJS was built by Fabrice Bellard for the purposes of making an embeddable JavaScript engine. They have completely different scopes. But it is not impossible that your use-case may not need HTTP or other functionality afforded by larger runtimes, in which case, I'd rather have a 6MB binary over an 85MB binary that has a bunch of things I don't need. > I might be wrong, but comparing quickjs to node/deno seems like comparing a aquarium pump to an electric car. My intention was not to compare QuickJS to Node/Deno, only their ability to create small binaries.