Balduzzi: Is there a v8 implementation for ruby?
Nayar: Hagb4rd, what do you mean?
Ireton: Nasalroad: i’m looking the responses from our jsonp service, it ranges from 200-800ms
Bavelas: Sth i could run js code in
Huddleson: Most languages have v8 bindings
Goudy: Yup. binding you say. okay. will google it.
Dhosane: Now have window.totango_options = {}
Nasalroad: Jumoke, no problem there: http://jsfiddle.net/progysm/vr2ewf9m/
Bansbach: Well, no error at least
Zuerlein: The code might not give the expected results
Afshari: But at least is running
Nasalroad: Hum, maybe I should delete that.
Gerdel: I wonder, would it be crazy hard to make a javascript interpreter?
Jaworsky: What do you mean eval?
Reichenback: There’s a JS interpreter call eval?
Blauvelt: MinusFour: they mean that “eval” is a function that interprets JavaScript
Hoople: And it’s in the core functions
Wakley: Dekok: The eval function and its cousins have two particular use cases: macro expansion, and evaluation of dynamically generated programs. If you don’t know any of these terms, eval is not the answer for your problem. For more information on what eval is and what it should be used for, see: http://blog.racket-lang.org/2011/10/on-eval-in-dynamic-languages-generally.html.
Galavis: Object.keys returns only an object’s own properties, right? As in hasOwnProperty?
Teroganesyan: Returns only an object’s own keys.okay, I guess both work.
Gleghorn: Ah yes, well, I wouldn’t want to use eval like that
Waterson: I’m just curious, how hard would it be to make an interpreter like v8 or spidermonkey
Preisler: Looks like an interesting proyect to fail at least
Schaen: MinusFour: v8 doesn’t interpret JavaScript, it only compiles it. SpiderMonkey has an interpreter, but it also compiles JavaScript.
Brayley: Both are *GIANT* pieces of software, which require you to understand quite a lot of compiler theory before attempting to replicate them
Spink: I think i know what it
Brizendine: I needed to put them all in one function
Puliafico: And they’re not really something doable for an one-person effort
Sawhill: A JS intepreter, without any optimisations, on the other hand, is reasonably easy to implement
Juriga: So, they aren’t interpreters, they are compilers?
Daskal: MinusFour: they are virtual machines. Inside those virtual machines, there are many compilers. It switches between compilers as your code executes.
Selin: V8 uses 3 compilers. Apple’s Nitro uses 5 compilers. SpiderMonkey uses one interpreter, and 2 compilers, I think. Maybe more.
Minalga: Just what *is* a moly, anyway?
Modha: You don’t want to know
Lamfers: For v8, in particular, it starts with the baseline compiler, which compiles your code really fast, but doesn’t generate very efficient machine code. It then watches how your code executes, selects some functions that seem important, and feed those to the optimising compiler, which takes care of generating efficient machine code based on the collected runtime
Piszczatowski: Information, type inference ****ysis, and other things. Once if finds that some function is really important, it feeds that to the Really Optimising Compiler Turbofan, which generates even more efficient machine code, but takes a lot of time to compile the function.
Plato: Is there a way to change the attributes a cl*** has in the .css file? I need to change that before the page is loaded so before any querying is possible
Rheingans: It works in similar ways for the others. The differences are which ****ysis they do, how they detect “what’s important” in your code, and which compilers do what.
Mehring: So it’s like a refining process
Esh: And this is how both SpiderMonkey and v8 can run the latest Unreal Engine in your browser, in JS, at 60 FPS