Javascript bytecode

[Max Samukha]

On Thursday, 20 December 2012 at 21:30:44 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> On Thursday, 20 December 2012 at 01:41:38 UTC, Walter Bright 
> wrote:
>> Not exactly, I argue that having a bytecode standard is 
>> useless. How a compiler works internally is fairly irrelevant.
>
> Note that in the first place, bytecode discussion has started 
> with the need of provide a CTFEable module that do not contains 
> more information that what is in a DI file, as it is a concern 
> for some companies.
>
> Bytecode can solve that problem nicely IMO. You mentioned that 
> DI is superior here, but I don't really understand how.

Walter is right that bytecode doesn't solve that problem at all. 
High level bytecodes like Microsoft IL are trivially decompiled 
into very readable source code. I did that frequently at one of 
my jobs when I needed to debug third-party .NET libraries that we 
didn't have source code for.

The advantage of bytecode is not in obfuscation. What Walter is 
wrong about is that bytecode is entirely pointless.