Fabrice Bellard Releases MicroQuickJS

Post by draven » Tue, Dec 23, 2025, 10:12 PM UTC

xonix wrote: post #208

norir wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't love a good deal of Lua's syntax, but I do think the authors had good reasons for their choices and have generally explained them. Even if you disagree, I think "without good reasons" is overly dismissive. Personally though, I think the distinctive choices are a boon. You are never confused about what language you are writing because Lua code is so obviously Lua. There is value in this. Once you have written…

Re: TCO Does the language give any guarantee that TCO was applied? In other words can it give you an error that the recursion is not of tail call form? Because I imagine a probability of writing a recursion and relying on it being TCO-optimized, where it's not. I would prefer if a language had some form of explicit TCO modifier for a function. Is there any language that has this?

Post by hnlmorg » Tue, Dec 23, 2025, 10:16 PM UTC

antirez wrote: post #111

If this had been available in 2010, Redis scripting would have been JavaScript and not Lua. Lua was chosen based on the implementation requirements, not on the language ones... (small, fast, ANSI-C). I appreciate certain ideas in Lua, and people love it, but I was never able to like Lua, because it departs from a more Algol-like syntax and semantics without good reasons, for my taste. This creates friction for newcom…

Post by aidenn0 » Tue, Dec 23, 2025, 10:18 PM UTC

rweichler wrote: post #140

antirez wrote: post #111

If this had been available in 2010, Redis scripting would have been JavaScript and not Lua. Lua was chosen based on the implementation requirements, not on the language ones... (small, fast, ANSI-C). I appreciate certain ideas in Lua, and people love it, but I was never able to like Lua, because it departs from a more Algol-like syntax and semantics without good reasons, for my taste. This creates friction for newcom…

I read this comment, about to snap back with an anecdote how I as a 13 year old was able to learn Lua quite easily, and then I stopped myself because that wasn't productive, then pondered what antirez might think of this comment, and then I realized that antirez wrote it.

Post by foobarchu » Tue, Dec 23, 2025, 10:22 PM UTC

garganzol wrote: post #200

simonw wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Down to -4. Is this generic LLM-dislike, or a reaction to perceived over-self-promotion, or something else? No matter how much you hate LLM stuff I think it's useful to know that there's a working proof of concept of this library compiled to WASM and working as a Python library. I didn't plan to share this on HN but then MicroQuickJS showed up on the homepage so I figured people might find it useful. (If I hadn't dis…

Thank you for sharing. A lot of HN people got cut by AI in one way or another, so they seem to have personal beefs with AI. I am talking about not only job shortages but also general humbling of the bloated egos.

Post by aidenn0 » Tue, Dec 23, 2025, 10:25 PM UTC

idle_zealot wrote: post #211

krackers wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually in JS array indexing is same as property indexing right? So it's actually looking up the string '0', as in arr['0']

Huh. I always thought that JS objects supported string and number keys separately, like lua. Nope! [Documents]$ cat test.js let testArray = []; testArray[0] = "foo"; testArray["0"] = "bar"; console.log(testArray[0]); console.log(testArray["0"]); [Documents]$ jsc test.js bar bar [Documents]$

  let testArray = [];
  testArray[0] = "foo";
  testArray["0"] = "bar";
  testArray["00"] = "baz";
  console.log(testArray[0]);
  console.log(testArray["0"]);
  console.log(testArray["00"]);