emscripten

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Nick Sabalausky" <a at a.a> wrote in message 
news:ieivqj$2s8u$1 at digitalmars.com...
> "Jeff Nowakowski" <jeff at dilacero.org> wrote in message 
> news:ieh83c$26gk$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> On 12/17/2010 09:18 PM, retard wrote:
>>>
>>> FWIW, JavaScript still isn't very efficiently supported on many
>>> platforms.
>>
>> Do you think performance is a problem for a mortgage calculator?
>>
>> I think the performance issues of JavaScript are way overblown for the 
>> majority of use cases. I think the biggest problem is people keeping open 
>> lots of tabs with crappy JavaScript running from ad farms.
>
> Ok, so why would I want to turn JS on and put up with those shitty 
> browser-killing, user-experience-killing JS Ads just for a calculator that 
> obviously doesn't need it?
>
> As for the "nearly a complete duplication of work", it's a duplication of 
> *a simple mathematical formula*. It's a near complete duplication *of 
> something that is utterly trivial to implement either way*. And if you 
> don't already have a system set up for the request/response stuff then 
> you've got a *really* dinky site. And if you *do* have such a dinky site, 
> then tossing in a basic client-server form is trivial.
>

Also, I'm not convinced that that duplication can't be abstracted away. 
Actualy, it definitely can be if you use Haxe. And maybe we would already 
have plenty other good ways to do that if developers weren't wasting their 
time making awful browser-skinning engines and implementing excel in a 
webpage.