If bignum performance doesn't matter, then Dart-to-JS code is generally no faster than other JS code. Duh!
If, as the leaked memo asserted, JS's lack of more than one number type is "unfixable", and we now see that Dart's fix is to add bignum as well as double, then bignum must matter. Else why do bignums in Dart?
This ignores the live bignum strawman on the ecmascript.org wiki, which Googlers on tc39 failed to champion.
If your argument is that bignum literal and operator syntax, not bignum performance, are what matters, I am with you -- but then why did no Google rep on tc39 work to advance the bignum strawman?
You can't have it both ways. It looks like some Google heavy hitters focused only on Dart as if it has a native VM, and not on Dart as a source language for JS, which implies certain obvious extensions to the ES standard.
If, as the leaked memo asserted, JS's lack of more than one number type is "unfixable", and we now see that Dart's fix is to add bignum as well as double, then bignum must matter. Else why do bignums in Dart?
This ignores the live bignum strawman on the ecmascript.org wiki, which Googlers on tc39 failed to champion.
If your argument is that bignum literal and operator syntax, not bignum performance, are what matters, I am with you -- but then why did no Google rep on tc39 work to advance the bignum strawman?
You can't have it both ways. It looks like some Google heavy hitters focused only on Dart as if it has a native VM, and not on Dart as a source language for JS, which implies certain obvious extensions to the ES standard.