It's difficult to ignore how the README is filled with Claudisms.
Scriptc by Vercel: TypeScript-to-Native compiler, no JavaScript engine in binary
11–20 of 165 posts
Re: Scriptc by Vercel: TypeScript-to-Native compiler, no JavaScript engine in binary
#12Porforr https://porffor.dev > has been working towards the same goal for a while. The creator, CanadaHonk https://honk.foo >, is extremely talented and the project still only passes ~68% of Test262. I'm more than a little suspicious of how Vercel has made so much progress so fast, unless I'm misunderstanding the scope of this project.
> I'm more than a little suspicious of how Vercel has made so much progress so fast Coding agents. They landed 918,000 lines of code in a single week: https://github.com/vercel-labs/scriptc/graphs/contributors?s...
- the architecture is idiotic.
- they have zero credible perf numbers.
I plan to benchmark it using generally accepted methods.
Porffor makes careful trade offs that make sense and is benchmarked in a way that I can believe.
(Source: I make dynamic languages fast for a living)
Re: Scriptc by Vercel: TypeScript-to-Native compiler, no JavaScript engine in binary
#13One of the strengths of TypeScript besides its expressiveness is that it's compatible with the massive npm ecosystem. Most packages only ship untyped JavaScript with type declarations defining the interface,[0] so realistically you'd still need a JavaScript engine if you use any packages. But if you're starting from scratch and know you won't be using any npm packages, you might as well use AssemblyScript.[2] [0]: Pu…
Re: Scriptc by Vercel: TypeScript-to-Native compiler, no JavaScript engine in binary
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm more than a little suspicious of how Vercel has made so much progress so fast Coding agents. They landed 918,000 lines of code in a single week: https://github.com/vercel-labs/scriptc/graphs/contributors?s...
That explains why: - the architecture is idiotic. - they have zero credible perf numbers. I plan to benchmark it using generally accepted methods. Porffor makes careful trade offs that make sense and is benchmarked in a way that I can believe. (Source: I make dynamic languages fast for a living)
Can you clarify what about the architecture is ‘idiotic’? Not trying to catch you or demand a defense, just looking for a vague description. I don’t even know how to start examining the architecture of something like this.
Re: Scriptc by Vercel: TypeScript-to-Native compiler, no JavaScript engine in binary
#15Re: Scriptc by Vercel: TypeScript-to-Native compiler, no JavaScript engine in binary
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
That explains why: - the architecture is idiotic. - they have zero credible perf numbers. I plan to benchmark it using generally accepted methods. Porffor makes careful trade offs that make sense and is benchmarked in a way that I can believe. (Source: I make dynamic languages fast for a living)
Putting aside the whole “team of professionals putting out a product vs solo dev fine tuning their opus” of it all: Can you clarify what about the architecture is ‘idiotic’? Not trying to catch you or demand a defense, just looking for a vague description. I don’t even know how to start examining the architecture of something like this.
- using quickjs at all in a thing that needs perf. Quickjs is hilariously slow. Midwits use it because it has “quick” in the name.
- using floats for numbers and deferring int optimizations for later. Inferring ints is like half the problem of fast JS.
- rejecting inadequately annotated or too dynamic code without a whole heck of a lot of self-reflection about how unlikely that is to work out.
The observation that languages that are even slightly dynamic need dynamic JIT opts is very old; folks figured that out in the 80s.
This project reeks of weapons grade AI psychosis
Re: Scriptc by Vercel: TypeScript-to-Native compiler, no JavaScript engine in binary
#17Re: Scriptc by Vercel: TypeScript-to-Native compiler, no JavaScript engine in binary
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Putting aside the whole “team of professionals putting out a product vs solo dev fine tuning their opus” of it all: Can you clarify what about the architecture is ‘idiotic’? Not trying to catch you or demand a defense, just looking for a vague description. I don’t even know how to start examining the architecture of something like this.
Yeah - using quickjs at all in a thing that needs perf. Quickjs is hilariously slow. Midwits use it because it has “quick” in the name. - using floats for numbers and deferring int optimizations for later. Inferring ints is like half the problem of fast JS. - rejecting inadequately annotated or too dynamic code without a whole heck of a lot of self-reflection about how unlikely that is to work out. The observation th…
Re: Scriptc by Vercel: TypeScript-to-Native compiler, no JavaScript engine in binary
#19Re: Scriptc by Vercel: TypeScript-to-Native compiler, no JavaScript engine in binary
#20It's difficult to ignore how the README is filled with Claudisms.
Looks like PRs are actively accepted. I just got rid of one of them! https://github.com/vercel-labs/scriptc/commit/c4b68dc6d9c259...