Second this. I get that they are saying - asm.js is cool, but it's on JS, so eugh.
Personally I'd love for a really low level language (statically typed, little if any magic, no-GC, multi-threaded) to work across all browsers, but I don't think browser vendors can just sit and say - here is the perfect cross browser language that will make all of net easy.
Perhaps the best strategy is to have low level strict language on top of which you build more easier to use constructs - which describes IMO both asm.js and PNaCl.
As the writer of the native compilers, I read the article as written from the kind of the developer who always developed in interpretative languages, who sees asm.js as "wrong" because "it's not the JavaScript he would write by hand.
And again. as the writer of the native compilers, I'm absolutely pro asm.js. I believe it's the best direction that JavaScript optimization can take, solving more hard problems elegantly. Including the fact that asm.js is a better representation than most of bytecodes (or even all). Seriously.
Personally I'd love for a really low level language (statically typed, little if any magic, no-GC, multi-threaded) to work across all browsers, but I don't think browser vendors can just sit and say - here is the perfect cross browser language that will make all of net easy.
Perhaps the best strategy is to have low level strict language on top of which you build more easier to use constructs - which describes IMO both asm.js and PNaCl.