Comment by brabel
2 days ago
How so?? JVM bytecode should be much easier to bind to, as the existence of JVM alternative runtimes for nearly every language shows.
2 days ago
How so?? JVM bytecode should be much easier to bind to, as the existence of JVM alternative runtimes for nearly every language shows.
Unless you're using a language that's specifically compile-to-jvm (e.g. Java, Kotlin or similar), almost nobody is using those JVM alternative runtimes. They're usually second-class runtimes that don't run the entire ecosystem of the target langauge. React Native runs JavaScript in a separate JS VM, Flutter is compiling Dart to native code with emdedded runtime, and Rust UI code also compiles to a native binary.
The "lingua franca" for language bindings is the C ABI which every other OS's platform libraries (Win32/Cocoa/GTK) support.
> The "lingua franca" for language bindings is the C ABI which every other OS's platform libraries (Win32/Cocoa/GTK) support.
Which is more like half of an API, it doesn't specify lifetimes so basically anything behind a pointer is unusable in itself. That's why we have "hacks" like gobjects and such, and why using most of the bindings is only possible if you have a decent binding library.