Building a JavaScript Runtime using C(devlogs.xyz)
84 pointsby redbell6 days ago9 comments
  • yb3032 days ago
    This is not "Building from scratch" This is just using.
    • Spivak2 days ago
      Runtime is the glue between JS Engine and OS which is from scratch. Runtime embeds engine and lets engine talk to the outside world.
      • throwawaymaths2 days ago
        engines only execute one JS microtask at a time, you must run it in something, that's the runtime.
  • djmips2 days ago
    This could useful to reference for when you want to put a JavaScript interpreter in your own custom software. For example I've seen JavaScript used for console game UI systems.
  • claytongulick2 days ago
    For those who would like a true "from scratch" implementation of JavaScript, Fabrice Bellard's QuickJS [1] is clean, readable and approachable. It's a full implementation of modern JavaScript in a straightforward project, not nearly as complex or difficult as V8.

    [1] https://bellard.org/quickjs/

    • hackthemack2 days ago
      QuickJS is amazing. You can put in javascript code, run it through QuickJS and make little binary utilities to run on their own.

      Someone took QuickJS and put it in wasm so you can run QuickJS in the browser or in node.

      https://github.com/justjake/quickjs-emscripten

      Fabrice Bellard is on another planet when it comes to programming. He also wrote FFmpeg and QEMU (among other things).

    • jhgb2 days ago
      To be fair, there's no claim being made that this was supposed to be a from-scratch implementation of Javascript. Just an equivalent to Deno/Node which don't have their own implementation of Javascript either.
      • ranger_danger2 days ago
        > there's no claim being made that this was supposed to be a from-scratch implementation of Javascript

        That is exactly how I interpreted the title of the article.

    • thdhhghgbhya day ago
      He's abandoned it now though.
  • bryanrasmussen2 days ago
    I guess I would like to see defining your global object in a real use case and adding some functions to your global object that make sense, which admittedly once you ask someone to do the creative work of making a use case that is sensible as they start implementing it they might find it is more useful to complete the implementation of that use case rather than releasing a starter tutorial.
  • TheCleric2 days ago
    I was a little disappointed that this was “just” a wrapper for JavaScriptCore.
    • gr4vityWall2 days ago
      Although not intuitive, it's common to call that the 'runtime' in the JS world, while V8 and JSC would be called 'JS engines'.

      Deno used similar wording in a tutorial for creating your own JS runtime using Rust and V8 bindings: https://deno.com/blog/roll-your-own-javascript-runtime

      IMO the tutorial is still cool nonetheless, it's a fun subject.

    • Minor49er2 days ago
      Agreed. It contradicts the whole "from scratch" idea. The article even has an engine implementation section where it just calls JavaScriptCore as you mentioned. It's a cool wrapper, but a misleading and disappointing article
      • trollied2 days ago
        Yup. I clicked on it, based on the title, and expected a long-form article. Not a simple library utilisation post.
    • jesse__2 days ago
      Yeah, I was expecting a lot more than "I glued some libraries together in C!", especially when the author is claiming 'from scratch'. Seems like a somewhat disingenuous title if you ask me..
      • jakogut2 days ago
        I suppose when your accustomed level of abstraction is interpreted languages like JavaScript, and "the web", "gluing some libraries together in C" is a somewhat novel and interesting endeavor.
        • jesse__2 days ago
          I bit my tongue and decided to hold that jab at JavaScript programmers, but yeah, I think that's exactly what were looking at here
          • jakogut2 days ago
            I wasn't trying to make any jabs, just an observation that getting outside of your comfort zone can be novel and interesting, even if it's mundane to people that commonly spend lots of time there.
    • curtisblaine2 days ago
      To be fair, all commercial non-browser runtimes (node, bun, deno) are "just" wrappers of V8 or JSC. Some more experimental ones are "just" wrappers of QuickJS and other less known engines.
      • throwawaymaths2 days ago
        iiuc its a runtime because the engine just dispatches one javascript microtask and returns to the runtime with a stack of remaining microtasks
  • ramon156a day ago
    The anchor links seem to be broken
  • measurablefunc2 days ago
    How about a formally verified runtime that takes the JS spec & constructs a runtime by converting the spec w/ incremental & verifiable transformations into an executable runtime?
    • aw1621107a day ago
      I think you'd need a "proper" formal spec (e.g., JSCert's version of ECMAScript 5 in Coq/Rocq [0]) for that to be feasible. Not exactly sure how "verifiable" would work otherwise.

      [0]: https://github.com/jscert/jscert

      • measurablefunca day ago
        They also use an unverified parser but good to know this exists.
        • aw162110714 hours ago
          That's true, though I think the general point stands - you need a "proper" formal spec to even begin thinking about a formally verified runtime. Presumably if you have a full formal spec a verified parser should be within reach.
  • lerp-io2 days ago
    unpopular comment : v8 > JavaScriptCore.
    • dunham2 days ago
      In general, yes, although it's nice to have more than one javascript implementation. And one advantage of JSC is that it implements tail call optimization (per the ES6 spec).

      I wrote my own language that targeted javascript. When I made my language self-hosting, I initially used `bun` (based on JSC), so I wouldn't have to implement a tail call transformation myself. It was expedient.

      My goal was to run in a browser, so I did eventually add that transformation and found that my compiler was 40% faster running in node (based on v8).