plv8 VS ixy-languages

a bit more than an experiment at this point. pljs, even in its early state, has some very good results: https://github.com/plv8/plv8/issues/531#issuecomment-1627883...

passing through v8's javascript/c++ membrane has always been painful, and appears to be getting worse.

From here you'll write a send_email function in Postgres that calls the API. I initially wrote the entire function in PLpgSQL and spent an entire day to get it debugged and working. And even then I wasn't happy with it. In my opinion that language is unintuitive and difficult to learn and debug. I switched over to PLV8, an extension for Postgres that supports writing functions in Javascript. It takes one click in the Supabase UI to enable this extension, and it will save hours and hours of time.

You jest, but the evil geniuses at plv8 have already done it for Postgresql.

To be honest I haven't used it, but I've extensively used pl/pgsql and a little pl/ruby, and know that https://plv8.github.io/ exists - it might be what you're looking for and it's on my list of things to play with

but, let's take your straw man a little further. let's suppose that all of the actual parsing is done for you already, and all you're doing is iterating through the data structure, creating objects through the c++ api, and calling it good. that should be faster than calling the c++ JSON.parse(), shouldn't it? since we don't have to actually parse anything, right? no, it's actually much slower. you can see this in action at https://github.com/plv8/plv8/blob/r3.1/plv8_type.cc#L173-L60...

again, we're not talking about whether javascript in an interpreter is faster than c++, we're talking about whether v8's api causes enough slowdown that some workloads that require a lot of data between c++ and javascript are slower than the same workload that requires very little data between c++ and javascript ... because passing through v8's c++/javascript membrane is slow.

Not really, here it is winning hands down over Swift's ARC implementation.

https://github.com/ixy-languages/ixy-languages

You laugh, but ... https://github.com/ixy-languages/ixy-languages

GC'd languages are designed to leverage GCs, meaning they usually allocate a lot. Some of the more recent ones (C#, Go) have ways around it or to limit it, but in your average GC'd language you have to really bend yourself out of shape to limit allocations (IIRC the Ixy effort / study / thing never managed to make the Java hotpath allocation-free).

It's kind of funny when you see things like this project: https://github.com/ixy-languages/ixy-languages

like not-even-in-the-same-ballpark faster. In this realworld example (userspace network drivers in managed languages) JS manages about 20-30% of native code performance, python iirc is below 1%

- Support for generic-aware value types (struct vs. class) and low-level features like stackalloc: very valuable for high-performance scenarios and native FFI. See for instance https://github.com/ixy-languages/ixy-languages. In comparison, Java doesn't even have unsigned integers. Yes, Project Valhalla is coming someday.

As well, debatable to some folks, but: properties (get/set); operator overloading; LINQ > Java streams; extension methods; default parameters; collection initializers; tuples; nullable reference types; a dozen smaller features

Very bottom of this file https://github.com/ixy-languages/ixy-languages/blob/master/Java-garbage-collectors.md