quickjs VS mold

It uses service workers to cache static files, by the time it opens up you already free to be offline, try toggle network switch to verify.

It has download link at bottom of the about page ([accdoo.app/about]) which you could then self host it by dropping into any static hosting services.

btw, the Pi feature was by-product from the original App but I won't expand here, if you'd like to learn more, please checkout its two Show HN post (39115559 and 39138957) previously.

[wiki]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chudnovsky_algorithm

[quickjs/pi]: https://bellard.org/quickjs/pi.html

[pi_bigint.js]: https://github.com/bellard/quickjs/blob/master/examples/pi_b...

[accdoo.app/about]: https://accdoo.app/about#releases

[39115559]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39115559

[39138957]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39138957

Just go with quickjs, I think this is what you are looking for.

https://bellard.org/quickjs/

QuickJS

I think QuickJS, written in C, is a user-"friendly" starting point for implementing ECMA-262. Documentation QuickJS Javascript Engine.

There is a readme on the project's main page: https://bellard.org/quickjs/

The newsworthy bit here is that the activity seemed to have stalled for year or two and now Fabrice pushed a few fixes and made a new release.

Just to demonstrate GitHub repositories do not necessarily reflect upon a programmers' body of work, Fabrice Bellard has one (1) repository published on GitHub, quickjs. Compare the list of work on Bellard's home page https://bellard.org/.

> I am still confused, it's a JavaScript runtime intended to be deployed to JavaScript/Wasm runtimes?

Seemingly.

> Why does a JavaScript runtime need a JavaScript runtime?

Because if you want to create a Service Worker server for CloudFlare Workers and other JavaScript/Wasm runtimes, that's the only option for doing that AFAIK.

FWIW, this isn't a new idea. For example, Figma uses QuickJS (https://bellard.org/quickjs/) for their plug-in runtime: https://www.figma.com/blog/an-update-on-plugin-security/

I think this is unlikely to gain traction. I say that no to discourage you, just to explain.

- The community has an instinctive distrust of closed source or a compiler from an untrusted source. If you’re familiar with the Trusting Trust attack you’ll understand why.

- Dev tools in every language ecosystem are almost always free, unless they involve some kind of hosting. People aren’t used to opening their wallets. Look the experience of the guy who built the mold linker(https://github.com/rui314/mold). Far superior to the state of art, improves incremental compiles a lot, widely applicable across ecosystems (C, C++, Rust), CPU architectures and Operating Systems. You don’t even have to modify your compiler, just need to point to his linker. He’s even giving it away for free for personal use. But still, almost no one uses it. The inertia of the established options is really high.

- It’s not complex enough. Think about the complexity involved in the cranelift backend. No one can seriously recreate the efforts of bjorn3. If we could have, we would have. But the idea idea here can be recreated, especially by the experts who already built incremental compilation into rustc.

- But if your solution is truly complex, like the parallel frontend, the burden of maintaining a fork would be too high. You’d have to spend all your time rebasing.

Again I’m not trying to discourage you, just stating the difficulties of making a business in the dev tools space. You would be better off contributing this excellent work to the community and trying a different tack.

I initially thought this would be about the mold linker (https://github.com/rui314/mold)

I assume this submission is trying to highlight the specific message (2023-01-24) : https://github.com/rui314/mold/issues/190#issuecomment-14028...

Fyi... the author wrote a more expansive blog post about selling dev tools a few months later (2023-06-06) and there was a related HN thread about it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36225016

Loongson's LoongArch CPU has been supported. (03b1a1c)

I'm amazed at how quickly the author responds to requests: https://github.com/rui314/mold/issues/1057

From the report to the fix in less than two days.

I'm not sure how competitive it will be with lld, especially if we consider ThinLTO (which takes multiple minutes on 64-core machine) - it can make the advantages of mold insignificant.

What other solutions have you tried for the problem of slow linking? You haven't even said which linker and what flags you're using. I haven't actually tried it, but the author of gold has an even faster linker called mold: https://github.com/rui314/mold

> Mold did it first, though: https://github.com/rui314/mold

Before LLD?