News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Opal - Ruby to Javascript compiler. Parent comment

Re:Opal - Ruby to Javascript compiler by Sanddancer on Friday October 19, 2012 @02:03PM (#4674715)
Using the language you're comfortable with client-side. Though what this really shows, once again, is that we really need a good, open, virtual machine specification for client-side byte code so we aren't stuck with the same javascript hammer for all problems.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Opal - Ruby to Javascript compiler by MatthewPhillips on Friday October 19, 2012 @03:37PM (#4675080)
? Doesn't this show that we aren't stuck with the same hammer? Opal is a different hammer.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Opal - Ruby to Javascript compiler by rrouse on Friday October 19, 2012 @04:33PM (#4675282)
Not really. You're still using Javascript in the end.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Opal - Ruby to Javascript compiler by ville on Friday October 19, 2012 @07:56PM (#4675856)
How is that a bad thing? Source code VMs are easier to secure and as the tooling improves, you don't need to look a the generated JS anymore to debug, it becomes "byte code".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Opal - Ruby to Javascript compiler by rcthompson on Friday October 19, 2012 @05:02PM (#4675375)
Wasn't that the original goal of Java, like, 20 years ago?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Opal - Ruby to Javascript compiler by Sanddancer on Friday October 19, 2012 @09:12PM (#4676022)
It was, but the big issue there was that sun decided to keep all the keys of the castle to themselves. Hence the desire for an open bytecode format.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Opal - Ruby to Javascript compiler by iso8859-1 on Friday October 19, 2012 @07:16PM (#4675778)
Native Client? Or PNaCl if you insist on extreme portability.
[ Parent | on HN ]