3 ms·
Years of effort have gone into making javascript VMs faster than they have any right to be. Even an ideal bytecode would likely be slower than javascript for y
by thedufer 13y ago
Years of effort have gone into making javascript VMs faster than they have any right to be. Even an ideal bytecode would likely be slower than javascript for years. It seems unlikely that many people would be willing to give up performance now for theoretical future performance, and without a reasonable amount of use, there's no good reason for browsers to implement the new bytecode.
For better or for worse, we're stuck with javascript for the foreseeable future.
- wmf 13y agoIsn't LLVM already faster than asm.js in most cases?
- iso8859-1 13y agoThe question makes no sense. Emscripten even uses LLVM, so this comparison is recursive.
- ahomescu1 13y agoEven an ideal bytecode would likely be slower than javascript for years -- no, statically-typed bytecode should be significantly faster than dynamically-typed JavaScript (both in execution and parsing time), IMHO.
- azakai 13y agoI agree that makes intuitive sense, but the article mentions numbers showing the opposite is true in some cases.