• Bye@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    But the browser can’t handle other languages? That seems a bit silly

    • Pankkake@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      6 months ago

      There’s a push towards WebAssembly. Officially it’s not supported yet, but most browsers can handle it. I don’t know how mature the project is though.

      But yeah, essentially everything on the web is JS.

        • Ephera@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Sure, but you can get frameworks that generate that for you. I’ve written whole webpages in WASM without writing any JS.

          You don’t get around reading JS documentation, though. Especially the DOM API is just documented as JS, and you basically hope that your framework makes it obvious enough how to write that in your non-JS language of choice.

          • Static_Rocket@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            6 months ago

            This is exactly the reason why I can’t believe that was ever a requirement. I would have crazy respect for webassembly if it could stand on it’s own as it would allow people to completely move away from JS, but if JS is still in the stack in any way it will introduce a (even if it is minimal) compatibility and maintenance cost in the long run.

            • Ephera@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              I used to think so, too, but on the one hand, the DOM API is absolutely massive. Going through the standardization, implementation and documentation process another time would take decades.

              And on the other hand, a language-agnostic API in WebAssembly would mean specifying it WebAssembly itself. And well, it’s Assembly-like, so what’s currently a single line for calling a JS function would turn into tens of lines of low-level code.

              Ultimately, you’d want code from some other high-level language to give you a summary of how you may need to call your language-specific wrapper. In practice, that’s likely even worse than translating it from JS, because the high-level call isn’t standardized.

        • lseif@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          i believe they plan to remove that requirement? at least i know they are trying to use a native wasm<->dom api instead of wasm<->js<->dom, which is slow

          • Static_Rocket@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Big if true, do you have a link to follow that development? I’ve been curious about some languages that compile to JS+WASM but I’ve been waiting for something like this to finally cut out the middle man and give me an excuse to learn WASM directly.

    • Ephera@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      There’s actually in theory all the pieces in place to use a different scripting language, because in the early days, there really were multiple. But yeah, the massive DOM API is only really standardized+implemented+documented for JS, so you don’t get around it in the end.

      As the others said, though, WebAssembly is starting to become a thing and the JS boilerplate for calling the DOM API can be generated for you.