A peek into a possible future of Python in the browser - Łukasz Langa

[rockslayer@lemmy.world]

I think if the idea is to replace js, it should be a superset language at the interpreter level. I.e. the interpreter can run js, but valid js wouldn't work with the compiler. It makes it a drop-in replacement without harming legacy

[thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.world]

Please please please can we just use type safe languages.

[taladar@sh.itjust.works]

Agreed. Just the idea of finally replacing JS with something only to be another of those "dynamic" languages makes me want to puke.

[pennomi@lemmy.world]

WebAssembly is the target, not js, I believe.

[seeferns@programming.dev]

Asking genuinely as someone who knows not much about this subject, is typescript not already an option? Isn’t it just type safe js that gets interpreted as js?

[sandlight@lemmy.world]

Typescript doesn't run in browser. It gets translated to js by some build steps.

[lemmebe@sh.itjust.works]

No, you can't if there's any semblance of a PR review process. Reject until it's type safe.

[lemmebe@sh.itjust.works]

Yes, it is and it's great.

[overspark@feddit.nl]

This isn't about replacing javascript, this compiles something that looks a bit like Python to C and then to WASM. Which browsers can run natively these days. But you can do that with any source language if there's a compiler for it, type safe or not. You can compile Rust to WASM too for example. So nothing's getting replaced, these are just additional tools for Web developers.

[shortrounddev@lemmy.world]

It's alright. I work with it every day and constantly wish it had RTTI

[banghida@lemm.ee]

Very interesting.

[lemmebe@sh.itjust.works]

Typia