No Stupid Questions (Developer Edition)

923 readers

1 users here now

This is a place where you can ask any programming / topic related to the instance questions you want!

For a more general version of this concept check out [email protected]

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

LinearArray

How feasible is a browser that uses something like Lua, Python or Ruby as its scripting language instead of JS? Also, how stupid is this idea (ignoring any "incompatibility with JS pages" situations)? (self.no_stupid_questions)

submitted 1 year ago by ICastFist to c/no_stupid_questions

10 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Or, put it another way, a html renderer that can open most web pages, but has a different programming/scripting language that it can interpret during runtime or on page loads, instead of the javascript engine.

I suppose that java applets, flash and activeX were attempts in these directions, but they were things you had to install on top of the browsers, so not quite the same thing? I'm imagining something like web pages using Lua, since it's lightweight, to make them dynamic.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] o11c 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's no point in replacing JS with another dynamically-typed language. JS has received a lot of attempts at depessimization. If you're going to replace it, it would have to be a language with real types (but reflection is still viable as a strictly-superior alternative to dynamic types)

[–] nous 1 points 1 year ago

I would just replace it with a compile target - aka WASM. Then the web is not tied to one language but many can be built on top of it. WASM does need to more features then what is currently available to fully replace JS. DOM access for one, and probably a GC to reduce the amount of runtime you would need to ship (at least for languages that use a GC).