emscripten

Alexander Pánek a.panek at brainsware.org
Tue Dec 14 08:27:28 PST 2010


Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
> On 12/14/10 9:25 AM, Sean Kelly wrote:
> > Adam Ruppe Wrote:
> >>
> >> Client side scripting sucks. It's garbage. Slow, incompatible, unreliable, and a
> >> piece of junk platform in general - it does very little that's interesting. That's
> >> not even getting into the language itself.

It's up to you what you're doing with the language/platform. I created some pretty decent almost-MVC apps with JS in the browser, using a lot of the language's features. If you're just hacking some stuff together.. ay.. then you might not get into the language itself. Anyways, your fault. :)

> > It totally sucks, but it does scale better than executing everything server-side.

Always a matter of using the right tools for the job.
 
> Surprisingly, it doesn't. Facebook is reducing its client-side 
> Javascript to a minimum in favor of server-side code. Reason? Speed. You 
> can't control user's OS, browser, and hardware platform, but you can 
> control your own.

I've never heard of that before. I can also not really imagine it, given that Facebook is one of the providers of the most-included JS cross-site snippets? Ever heard of FBML? The only thing they reduced was the *markup* code which was slowing some browsers down when displaying a lot of items in the feed. Javascript isn't a bottleneck here, they really did a good job on the architecture of the whole site.

D as server-side was once something I tried to achieve, but it wasn't the right time. It would have been perfect as backend for a full-blown JS browser app, only handling & shuffling data around, sending JSON back and forth.

Cheers, Alex


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list