> In developing this interpreter they eliminated some of the languages features to make it simpler.
That means you can't run general-purpose code safely, which means you should probably write/rewrite/adapt it, which means you might as well use a different language.
I'm a JS developer, but the parent might have a point here. Why run something like this in production when you're likely to end up in unexpected situations? Either a runtime is compliant, or you're going to have a bad time.
The project is cool, but I wouldn't use it as an example for what JS can do.
That means you can't run general-purpose code safely, which means you should probably write/rewrite/adapt it, which means you might as well use a different language.
I'm a JS developer, but the parent might have a point here. Why run something like this in production when you're likely to end up in unexpected situations? Either a runtime is compliant, or you're going to have a bad time.
The project is cool, but I wouldn't use it as an example for what JS can do.