skatepark

8 ms·

31.
by skatepark 14y ago
As a said to another commenter, this is selective bias. Do you think a systems/application developer, who believes in those ideas, would choose to work at, or be a part of, Mozilla, given Eich's clear and verbose positions that stand entire
32.
by skatepark 14y ago
Emscripten doesn't treat LLVM bitcode as a first-class target, it treats it as an intermediate target to be translated into JavaScript. [high level language] -> [low level representation] -> [high level language] -> [low level r
33.
by skatepark 14y ago
It's selective bias. I, like many other professional application and systems engineers who didn't originate in the web space, wouldn't participate in Mozilla, nor try to work there. I'm just not interested in continuing to try fit the squar
34.
by skatepark 14y ago
The "path of least resistance" has not been particularly successful in helping the web provide a robust platform for application development over the past 10 years. I don't see why the hack-and-slash "pragmatism" should be expected to start
35.
by skatepark 14y ago
> I think I have demonstrated that Mozilla's insistence on JS and other standards is not holding back the Web as an application platform by any means. I don't really believe that you have. As simple aggregate counter-evidence, I will
36.
by skatepark 14y ago
It'd be even easier with a clean bytecode, and it wouldn't require nearly as much effort and round-about solutions. It also would simplify portable tool development, including source-level debuggers.
37.
by skatepark 14y ago
It's the users that pay the cost, instead of the developers. Mobile is winning the app war for a reason.
38.
by skatepark 14y ago
> What would a standardized bytecode bring to the table over asm.js? A better technical solution and lower development friction throughout the entire stack. The hackiness of the web already introduces an enormous amount of cumulative
39.
by skatepark 14y ago
> An alternate explanation that doesn't involve a fantasy world where Brendan Eich issues oppressive decrees from his throne of skulls ... Eich is the CTO and sets the technical direction for one of the four major browsers. The browse
40.
by skatepark 14y ago
Yes, but: Mozilla disagrees because Eich disagrees, and Eich disagrees because he's built his entire career on top of his invention of JavaScript. Is there really anyone other than Eich -- producing ANY platform -- that thinks that JavaScri
41.
by skatepark 14y ago
> Honestly that's only an implementation dependent detail. Not really, no. JavaScript is a ridiculously high-level target for another language, and this introduces a huge amount of complexity in any effort to target it efficiently. Yo
42.
by skatepark 14y ago
> Yup, I did it all -- mwah-hah-hah! I made Apple and Microsoft, iOS WebKit minions at Apple especially, even SJ, do my bidding in resisting poor pretty PNaCl. No, you've simply held back the only other entity interested in making the
43.
by skatepark 14y ago
JavaScript as a compilation target is ineffecient for both runtime and development; it's a hack. PNaCL -- and any other alternatives -- are in no small part incomplete because Eich has stated repeatedly in no uncertain terms that its JavaSc
44.
by skatepark 14y ago
Mozilla -- and Brendan Eich specifically -- have held back the web as a platform for years. Brendan Eich is myopically focused on the DOM and JavaScript monoculture -- rather than the underlying potential of the web: a standardized and comp