[Sanddancer]

Using the language you're comfortable with client-side. Though what this really shows, once again, is that we really need a good, open, virtual machine specification for client-side byte code so we aren't stuck with the same javascript hammer for all problems.

[MatthewPhillips]

? Doesn't this show that we aren't stuck with the same hammer? Opal is a different hammer.

[rrouse]

Not really. You're still using Javascript in the end.

[ville]

How is that a bad thing? Source code VMs are easier to secure and as the tooling improves, you don't need to look a the generated JS anymore to debug, it becomes "byte code".

[rcthompson]

Wasn't that the original goal of Java, like, 20 years ago?

[Sanddancer]

It was, but the big issue there was that sun decided to keep all the keys of the castle to themselves. Hence the desire for an open bytecode format.

[iso8859-1]

Native Client? Or PNaCl if you insist on extreme portability.