[TLUG]: ECMAScript ("Javascript") Version 4 - FALSE ALARM

Maciej Stachowiak mjs at apple.com
Tue Oct 30 12:04:37 PDT 2007

On Oct 30, 2007, at 10:45 AM, Steven Johnson wrote:

> The suggestions of bloat and instability from some corners are rather
> disingenuous when you consider that
> (1) at least one high-quality ES4 engine (Tamarin) will be available  
> with a
> source license compatible with both open-source and commercial  
> vendors, so
> the claim that it will be hard for browser vendors to implement can
> theoretically be reduced to a claim that it will be hard for browser  
> vendors
> to integrate. (Sure, there may be technical or political obstacles  
> to using
> a particular engine, but assuming that the ES4 spec will require every
> browser vendor to write their own implementation is clearly false.)
> (2) at least two active contributors to Tamarin (Adobe and Mozilla)  
> have a
> very high vested interest in keeping code size small, as the success  
> of both
> Flash Player and Firefox are predicated on acceptable download sizes.
> As Tom pointed out, the compiler for ES4 will definitely get more  
> complex,
> but the VM is unlikely to grow significantly in size or complexity.

For embedded browser-hosted implementations (like Safari on the iPhone  
and iPod touch, or Nokia's S60 Browser), it's important for it to be  
possible to implement a complier that is small in memory use and code  
footprint, not just a VM. I have not yet read the spec in enough  
detail to know if this is the case. But your points seem to primarily  
address VM size, and to my knowledge the Flash download only includes  
the VM, not a compiler.

Can anyone address feasibility of a small full implementation (source  
code all the way to execution)?


More information about the Es4-discuss mailing list