4 ms·

What exactly is proprietary about it? Browser vendors are free to integrate the VM into their products, and if they don't want to there is dart2js which is acc

What exactly is proprietary about it? Browser vendors are free to integrate the VM into their products, and if they don't want to there is dart2js which is acceptable. This isn't even close to the situation presented by Silverlight, ActiveX and I feel like you're being duplicitous by comparing them.

pcwalton 13y ago
> Browser vendors are free to integrate the VM into their products, and if they don't want to there is dart2js which is acceptable. That's a tremendous amount of effort and it is likely to reduce the performance of JavaScript. Cross-language GC, in particular, is really hard. See Filip Pizlo's message to webkit-dev on this subject (citing two recent papers), which is part of the reason that Dart support was shot down when Google proposed adding it to WebKit: https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2011-December/018811.html https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2011-December/...
- skybrian 13y ago
  As of today, dart2js is the only way to deploy Dart to users' browsers, Chrome included. It already performs well enough for most apps. The Dart VM is nice but its primary purpose right now is running the Dart compiler and in Dartium which is only used by developers. (You can use it for other things but the ecosystem isn't there yet.)
- chrismsnz 13y ago
  Right, I can understand that. It's a lot of effort to put in up-front just to support Google's pet project of the day. This is a really good reason why dart2js exists and why so much effort has been expended in making it good. However, I think that if Dart proves to be a compelling platform for developers I don't think it's out of the question for browser vendors to put some serious thought into integrating the Dart VM natively alongside JS. After all, Google is going to be doing exactly that with Chrome/Chromium...
epsylon 13y ago
> Browser vendors are free to integrate the VM into their products No they aren't. Integrating a Google-controlled VM into any software project (for example, Firefox) isn't trivial (you need lots of resources for it) nor is desirable (the technology is driven and controlled by Google).
- sigzero 13y ago
  You points don't speak to the statement. Browser vendors are FREE to integrate it. Whether they will because of the technical costs is a totally separate statement and quandary.

pcwalton 13y ago

> Browser vendors are free to integrate the VM into their products, and if they don't want to there is dart2js which is acceptable. That's a tremendous amount of effort and it is likely to reduce the performance of JavaScript. Cross-language GC, in particular, is really hard. See Filip Pizlo's message to webkit-dev on this subject (citing two recent papers), which is part of the reason that Dart support was shot down when Google proposed adding it to WebKit: https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2011-December/018811.html https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-dev/2011-December/...

skybrian 13y ago
As of today, dart2js is the only way to deploy Dart to users' browsers, Chrome included. It already performs well enough for most apps. The Dart VM is nice but its primary purpose right now is running the Dart compiler and in Dartium which is only used by developers. (You can use it for other things but the ecosystem isn't there yet.)
chrismsnz 13y ago
Right, I can understand that. It's a lot of effort to put in up-front just to support Google's pet project of the day. This is a really good reason why dart2js exists and why so much effort has been expended in making it good. However, I think that if Dart proves to be a compelling platform for developers I don't think it's out of the question for browser vendors to put some serious thought into integrating the Dart VM natively alongside JS. After all, Google is going to be doing exactly that with Chrome/Chromium...

epsylon 13y ago

> Browser vendors are free to integrate the VM into their products No they aren't. Integrating a Google-controlled VM into any software project (for example, Firefox) isn't trivial (you need lots of resources for it) nor is desirable (the technology is driven and controlled by Google).

sigzero 13y ago
You points don't speak to the statement. Browser vendors are FREE to integrate it. Whether they will because of the technical costs is a totally separate statement and quandary.