NaCl/Emscripten

[via Digitalmars-d]

On Sunday, 11 January 2015 at 01:05:59 UTC, Manu via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> The thing about cheerp vs emscripten, is that while cheerp 
> produces
> code that is more like javascript, emscripten produces asm.js, 
> which
> is lightning fast by comparison.
> If there's actual work being done, then emscripten is the 
> choice, if
> it's just as a substitute for writing js code, because it's a
> nightmare, then cheerp is probably better.

You are probably right about throughput which I would expect to 
be better with Emscripten than Cheerp, although keep in mind that 
only Firefox converts asm.js directly to asm without the regular 
JIT. IE and Chrome uses the regular JIT AFAIK.

With asm.js you are also stuck with a fixed size heap and if you 
manage to implement GC on asm.js, you get the freeze... Then you 
have interop with JS. Not sure if you can interact with 
Worker-threads within asm.js?

I had not heard of Cheerp until today, but it looks interesting 
to me.