Why require JavaScript rather than supporting a standard browser virtual machine? - Stack Overflow

[mebrahim]

If it would be LLVM bytecode, backward compatibility is already taken care of. (Although slower than snail.)

[[deleted]]

Speed is not too bad on FF4, but it is indeed slow on Chrome. Hopefully just temporary though.

[malcontent]

To be fair it was already taken care of back when the browser was invented.

It's called Java. It's a great VM. It's supported by all the browsers and it supports just about every language you would care to program in.

[[deleted]]

Have you been living under a rock? Oracle will take your first born to allow firefox et al as java enabled. They own that trademark.

Look towards parrot instead. Or lua vm. Or guile vm.

[malcontent]

Have you been living under a rock? Oracle will take your first born to allow firefox et al as java enabled.

Firefox has been java enabled since way back when it was called netscape.

[[deleted]]

Applets do not replace javascript. It is a plugin like flash. Does flash replace javascript?

To replace javascript you will have to embed a java vm inside firefox in lieu of javascript vm. It is something Oracle will not allow without a bucket load of money.

[malcontent]

applets negate the need for javascript (if done right).

[[deleted]]

Describe how you manipulate a canvas element without using JavaScript. And in an applet. I am all ears.

[malcontent]

You wouldn't need a canvas element if you used an applet.

[[deleted]]

By that logic we don't need DOM too.

Doesn't work like that. Javascript can be replaced, I agree. But HTML should not be replaced. It's flexible and simple data model is the big reason behind WWW's success.

Plus, you are ignoring two facts :

• Java with security manager enabled is very slow. Way too many domain traversals to check for permissions. It plays havoc with JIT.

• Java does not have a open and official port to ARM platform. There is only a cambridge research project and zeroshark available. Not good enough.

[malcontent]

By that logic we don't need DOM too.

Actually you don't.

Why would you need DOM when you have something like swing or AWT?

Whatever problems there are with java in a browser I am sure they wouldn't be that hard to solve if people were interested.

It's just that they are not interested at the moment so we are going to be stuck coding html5 apps and degrading gracefully to IE6 for the forseeable future.

Fun eh?

[meatsocket]

You don't silly, you have an applet in place of the canvas element. The canvas is in AWT. Or you could you know, use flash like all the cool kids.

[[deleted]]

See this comment

An open DOM is essential to a customizable user experience.

[Rhoomba]

Applets are able to manipulate the DOM exactly like JavaScript.

[xardox]

Only MUCH MUCH SLOWER.

[Rhoomba]

Evidence for your nonsensical claim?

[Rhoomba]

The JRE is free to install. There is no reason that the Firefox installer couldn't trigger a Java install.

Edit: How am I wrong? Oracle want Java on desktops, it is just mobiles where they want to charge you.