But translating to high-level JS code would require to keep up with the new
features (or babel) while compiling to low-level JS code is future proof.
And Google Closure compiler works.
I only meant that it is probably a more direct translation, and their full time
employees are actively developing and working on optimizing etc. so Nim can
benefit from that. I imagine in the future, instead of keeping up with js new
features and possibly deprecations, no effort is being lost on
It is **not** "generated semi-obfuscated code" it's just generated code. And
producing more "human-like" code is _more_ effort, not less.
> They also support newer versions of javascript like es2015, which are more
> concise.
So what? We don't need new JS features, we **compile to** JavaScript.
But we can already use Google Closure compiler.
Also Nim is already readable and can already target WASM. I expect going to
WASM through C or directly via LLVM is much more efficient. Javascript and
Typescript probably lose all relevant type information, especially for integers
and arrays. I ex
instead of this generated semi-obfuscated code, you get idiomatic and readable
code in the other language, and leave it to their compiler to make optimized
js, perhaps they will have other targets like wasm in the future, so you can
reuse their efforts/work-force advantage/features.
whats the point? code produced by nim is not supposed to be read, unless for
some edge case debugging.
Hello, I don't know if it has been asked before:
nowadays, there are a few languages whose specialty is compiling to javascript,
while at the same time are much closer to Nim in terms of semantics and
features, notably typescript, and others like dart. typescript is backed by
microsoft. Now tha
